-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 632
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Add future::pinned combinator #1023
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
futures-util/src/future/pinned.rs
Outdated
/// Created by the `borrowed` function. | ||
#[must_use = "futures do nothing unless polled"] | ||
#[allow(missing_debug_implementations)] | ||
pub struct PinnedFut<'any, Data: 'any, Output, F: PinnedFn<Data, Output> + 'any> { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can't actually make this work because I get stuck on that PinnedFut
isn't allowed to outlive 'any
no matter what I do. This seems like I need #[may_dangle]
, but somehow stronger. I don't even need a lifetime to be part of the type-- I just need a lifetime that does not outlive Data
(can't always use 'static
) but which will unify with other lifetimes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Even using 'static doesn't work-- then the implied WF checks for HRTB aren't kicking in for some reason: i get errors that T: for<'a> PinnedFnLt<'a, Data, Output>
isn't satisfied if I add a where Self: 'a
bound to PinnedFnLt
.
Okay, I've got a minimal reproduction of the issue here. It seems like higher ranked bounds for traits implemented by closures like this don't work. |
Opened an issue: rust-lang/rust#51004 |
// TODO: | ||
// marker: Pinned, | ||
// Data, which may be borrowed by `fn_or_fut`, must be dropped last | ||
data: Data, |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Maybe this should use ManuallyDrop
so as to not rely on drop order?
(AFAIK drop order is actually "first field is dropped last", so this may even be wrong right now.)
I don't think I really understand what is going on here... what is the crazy stuff that's going on here, other than some funny shenanigans with |
@RalfJung One of the fields is being allowed to hold a |
Well, you can get a little bit further with this nowadays on nightly, but still the actual usage fails due to the way elision inside closures works: https://play.rust-lang.org/?version=nightly&mode=debug&edition=2021&gist=b480eb854734a23aa525cf60dc71a40d |
This is a preliminary attempt at a massively unsafe manual self-borrowing future to allow working with borrowing
futures
combinators without relying onasync
/await
. I'm uncomfortable about the number of different crazy hacks happening here-- hopefully we can whittle those down. Ideally this wouldn't be replaced entirely by async/await someday, at which point we can remove this, but it could allow moving stable code over to the new borrowing versions of e.g.Stream::next
andAsyncRead::read
.I'm not even sure that this is possible to express correctly in Rust's surface syntax, since the
Self
type contains a value as well as a live field with a live&mut
inside of it.UnsafeCell
isn't enough here, and I don't know what is. Perhaps it's enough to know that we never create an&mut
reference toself.data
whileself.fn_or_fut
holds a future containing a reference toself.data
? I wouldn't have thought so, but I don't know what to do otherwise. cc @Zoxc and @alexcrichton, who know how self-referential generators are implemented-- do they rely on special magic for this? cc also @RalfJung, primarily so they're aware of the crazy pinning shenanigans happening here.