Singly-Linked List in Rust - linked-list

I've been trying to teach myself some Rust lately and wanted to practice a bit by implementing a simple linked list. I took some inspiration from the Rust library's linked list and tried to replicate the parts I already understood. Also I decided to make it singly-linked for now.
struct Node<T> {
element: T,
next: Option<Box<Node<T>>>,
}
impl<T> Node<T> {
fn new(element: T) -> Self {
Node {
element: element,
next: None,
}
}
fn append(&mut self, element: Box<Node<T>>) {
self.next = Some(element);
}
}
pub struct LinkedList<T> {
head: Option<Box<Node<T>>>,
tail: Option<Box<Node<T>>>,
len: u32,
}
impl<T> LinkedList<T> {
pub fn new() -> Self {
head: None,
tail: None,
len: 0,
}
pub fn push(&mut self, element: T) {
let node: Box<Node<T>> = Box::new(Node::new(element));
match self.tail {
None => self.head = Some(node),
Some(mut ref tail) => tail.append(node),
}
self.tail = Some(node);
self.len += 1;
}
pub fn pop(&mut self) -> Option<T> {
//not implemented
}
pub fn get(&self, index: u32) -> Option<T> {
//not implemented
}
}
This is what I've got so far; from what I understand, the problem with this code is that the Box can not have more than one reference to it in order to preserve memory safety.
So when I set the list head to node in
None => self.head = Some(node),
I can't then go ahead and set
self.tail = Some(node);
later, am I correct so far in my understanding? What would be the correct way to do this? Do I have to use Shared like in the library or is there a way in which the Box or some other type can be utilized?

Your issue is that you are attempting to use a value (node) after having moved it; since Box<Node<T>> does not implement Copy, when you use it in the match expression:
match self.tail {
None => self.head = Some(node),
Some(ref mut tail) => tail.append(node),
}
node is moved either to self.head or to self.tail and can no longer be used later. Other than reading the obligatory Learning Rust With Entirely Too Many Linked Lists to see the different ways in which you can implement linked lists in Rust, I suggest that you first do some more research in the field of Rust's basic concepts, especially:
Ownership
References and Borrowing
What are move semantics?

You can go with something simpler than that, only using your nodes
use std::fmt;
struct Payload {
id: i32,
value: i32,
}
impl fmt::Display for Payload {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
write!(f, "({}, {})", self.id, self.value)
}
}
struct Node<T> {
element: T,
next: Option<Box<Node<T>>>,
}
impl<T> Node<T> where T: std::fmt::Display{
fn new(element: T) -> Self {
Node {
element: element,
next: None,
}
}
fn append(&mut self, element: T) {
match &mut self.next {
None => {let n = Node {
element: element,
next: None,
};
self.next = Some(Box::new(n));
},
Some(ref mut x) => x.append(element),
}
}
fn list(& self) {
println!("{}", self.element);
match &self.next {
None => {},
Some(x) => x.list(),
}
}
}
fn main(){
let mut h = Node::new(Payload {id:1, value:1});
h.append(Payload {id:2, value:2});
h.append(Payload {id:3, value:3});
h.append(Payload {id:4, value:4});
h.append(Payload {id:5, value:5});
h.list();
h.append(Payload {id:6, value:6});
h.list();
}

Related

Match a slug with Nom

I've been trying for some time to find a decent solution for Nom to recognize the slug as an alpha1.
So I could parse something like this
fn parse<'a>(text: &'a str) -> IResult<&'a str, &'a str> {
delimited(char(':'), slug, char(':'))(text)
}
assert!(
parse(":hello-world-i-only-accept-alpha-numeric-char-and-dashes:"),
"hello-world-i-only-accept-alpha-numeric-char-and-dashes"
);
I tried with something like this but it seems to doesn't work.
fn slug<T, E: ParseError<T>>(input: T) -> IResult<T, T, E>
where
T: InputTakeAtPosition,
<T as InputTakeAtPosition>::Item: AsChar + Clone,
{
input.split_at_position1(
|item| {
let c = item.clone().as_char();
!(item.is_alpha() || c == '-')
},
ErrorKind::Char,
)
}
PS: Do you know how to tell Nom that the "-" in a slug must not be at the beginning nor the end?
There is nom::multi::separated_list for exactly this. And since you want the result to be string itself rather than a vector of segments, combining it with nom::combinator::recognize will do the trick:
use std::error::Error;
use nom::{
IResult,
character::complete::{alphanumeric1, char},
combinator::recognize,
multi::separated_list,
sequence::delimited,
};
fn slug_parse<'a>(text: &'a str) -> IResult<&'a str, &'a str> {
let slug = separated_list(char('-'), alphanumeric1);
delimited(char(':'), recognize(slug), char(':'))(text)
}
fn main() -> Result<(), Box<dyn Error>> {
let (_, res) = slug_parse(":hello-world-i-only-accept-alpha-numeric-char-and-dashes:")?;
assert_eq!(
res,
"hello-world-i-only-accept-alpha-numeric-char-and-dashes"
);
Ok(())
}

With closures as parameter and return values, is Fn or FnMut more idiomatic?

Continuing from How do I write combinators for my own parsers in Rust?, I stumbled into this question concerning bounds of functions that consume and/or yield functions/closures.
From these slides, I learned that to be convenient for consumers, you should try to take functions as FnOnce and return as Fn where possible. This gives the caller most freedom what to pass and what to do with the returned function.
In my example, FnOnce is not possible because I need to call that function multiple times. While trying to make it compile I arrived at two possibilities:
pub enum Parsed<'a, T> {
Some(T, &'a str),
None(&'a str),
}
impl<'a, T> Parsed<'a, T> {
pub fn unwrap(self) -> (T, &'a str) {
match self {
Parsed::Some(head, tail) => (head, &tail),
_ => panic!("Called unwrap on nothing."),
}
}
pub fn is_none(&self) -> bool {
match self {
Parsed::None(_) => true,
_ => false,
}
}
}
pub fn achar(character: char) -> impl Fn(&str) -> Parsed<char> {
move |input|
match input.chars().next() {
Some(c) if c == character => Parsed::Some(c, &input[1..]),
_ => Parsed::None(input),
}
}
pub fn some_v1<T>(parser: impl Fn(&str) -> Parsed<T>) -> impl Fn(&str) -> Parsed<Vec<T>> {
move |input| {
let mut re = Vec::new();
let mut pos = input;
loop {
match parser(pos) {
Parsed::Some(head, tail) => {
re.push(head);
pos = tail;
}
Parsed::None(_) => break,
}
}
Parsed::Some(re, pos)
}
}
pub fn some_v2<T>(mut parser: impl FnMut(&str) -> Parsed<T>) -> impl FnMut(&str) -> Parsed<Vec<T>> {
move |input| {
let mut re = Vec::new();
let mut pos = input;
loop {
match parser(pos) {
Parsed::Some(head, tail) => {
re.push(head);
pos = tail;
}
Parsed::None(_) => break,
}
}
Parsed::Some(re, pos)
}
}
#[test]
fn try_it() {
assert_eq!(some_v1(achar('#'))("##comment").unwrap(), (vec!['#', '#'], "comment"));
assert_eq!(some_v2(achar('#'))("##comment").unwrap(), (vec!['#', '#'], "comment"));
}
playground
Now I don't know which version is to be preferred. Version 1 takes Fn which is less general, but version 2 needs its parameter mutable.
Which one is more idiomatic/should be used and what is the rationale behind?
Update: Thanks jplatte for the suggestion on version one. I updated the code here, that case I find even more interesting.
Comparing some_v1 and some_v2 as you wrote them I would say version 2 should definitely be preferred because it is more general. I can't think of a good example for a parsing closure that would implement FnMut but not Fn, but there's really no disadvantage to parser being mut - as noted in the first comment on your question this doesn't constrain the caller in any way.
However, there is a way in which you can make version 1 more general (not strictly more general, just partially) than version 2, and that is by returning impl Fn(&str) -> … instead of impl FnMut(&str) -> …. By doing that, you get two functions that each are less constrained than the other in some way, so it might even make sense to keep both:
Version 1 with the return type change would be more restrictive in its argument (the callable can't mutate its associated data) but less restrictive in its return type (you guarantee that the returned callable doesn't mutate its associated data)
Version 2 would be less restrictive in its argument (the callable is allowed to mutate its associated data) but more restrictive in its return type (the returned callable might mutate its associated data)

Borrowed RefCell does not last long enough when iterating over a list

I'm trying to implement a linked list to understand smart pointers in Rust. I defined a Node:
use std::{cell::RefCell, rc::Rc};
struct Node {
val: i32,
next: Option<Rc<RefCell<Node>>>,
}
and iterate like
fn iterate(node: Option<&Rc<RefCell<Node>>>) -> Vec<i32> {
let mut p = node;
let mut result = vec![];
loop {
if p.is_none() {
break;
}
result.push(p.as_ref().unwrap().borrow().val);
p = p.as_ref().unwrap().borrow().next.as_ref();
}
result
}
the compiler reports an error:
error[E0716]: temporary value dropped while borrowed
--> src/main.rs:27:13
|
27 | p = p.as_ref().unwrap().borrow().next.as_ref();
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ -
| | |
| | temporary value is freed at the end of this statement
| | ... and the borrow might be used here, when that temporary is dropped and runs the destructor for type `std::cell::Ref<'_, Node>`
| creates a temporary which is freed while still in use
| a temporary with access to the borrow is created here ...
|
= note: consider using a `let` binding to create a longer lived value
What happened? Can't we use a reference to iterate on a node defined this way?
Instead of assigning p the borrowed reference, you need to clone the Rc:
use std::cell::RefCell;
use std::rc::Rc;
struct Node {
val: i32,
next: Option<Rc<RefCell<Node>>>,
}
fn iterate(node: Option<Rc<RefCell<Node>>>) -> Vec<i32> {
let mut p = node;
let mut result = vec![];
loop {
let node = match p {
None => break,
Some(ref n) => Rc::clone(n), // Clone the Rc
};
result.push(node.as_ref().borrow().val); //works because val is Copy
p = match node.borrow().next {
None => None,
Some(ref next) => Some(Rc::clone(next)), //clone the Rc
};
}
result
}
fn main() {
let node = Some(Rc::new(RefCell::new(Node {
val: 0,
next: Some(Rc::new(RefCell::new(Node { val: 1, next: None }))),
})));
let result = iterate(node);
print!("{:?}", result)
}
This is necessary because you are trying to use a variable with a shorter lifespan in a context that requires a longer lifespan. The result of p.as_ref().unwrap().borrow() is dropped (i.e. freed, de-allocated) after the loop iteration, but you are trying to use its members in the next loop (this is called use after free and one of the design goals of Rust is to prevent that).
The issue is that borrows do not own the object. If you want to use the next as p in the next loop, then p will have to own the object. This can be achieved with Rc (i.e. 'reference counted') and allows for multiple owners in a single thread.
What if the definition of Node::next is Option<Box<RefCell<Node>>>, how to iterate over this list?
Yes, I'm also very confused with RefCell, without RefCell we can iterate over list using reference only, but will fail with RefCell. I even tried to add a vector of Ref to save the reference, but still can not success.
If you drop the RefCell you can iterate it like this:
struct Node {
val: i32,
next: Option<Box<Node>>,
}
fn iterate(node: Option<Box<Node>>) -> Vec<i32> {
let mut result = vec![];
let mut next = node.as_ref().map(|n| &**n);
while let Some(n) = next.take() {
result.push(n.val);
let x = n.next.as_ref().map(|n| &**n);
next = x;
}
result
}
fn main() {
let node = Some(Box::new(Node {
val: 0,
next: Some(Box::new(Node { val: 1, next: None })),
}));
let result = iterate(node);
print!("{:?}", result)
}
Maybe it's possible with a RefCell as well, but I was not able to work around the lifetime issues.
I bring a little different code from above answer, one match expression in the loop.
fn iterate(node: Option<Rc<RefCell<ListNode>>>) -> Vec<i32>{
let mut result = vec![];
let mut p = match node{
Some(x) => Rc::clone(&x),
None => return result,
};
loop {
result.push(p.as_ref().borrow().val); //works because val is Copy
let node = match &p.borrow().next{
Some(x) => Rc::clone(&x),
None => break,
};
p = node;
}
result
}

Conflicting lifetime requirements when storing closure capturing returned value

EDIT:
I'm trying to create a vector of closures inside a function, add a standard closure to the vector, and then return the vector from the function. I'm getting an error about conflicting lifetimes.
Code can be executed here.
fn vec_with_closure<'a, T>(f: Box<FnMut(T) + 'a>) -> Vec<Box<FnMut(T) + 'a>>
{
let mut v = Vec::<Box<FnMut(T)>>::new();
v.push(Box::new(|&mut: t: T| {
f(t);
}));
v
}
fn main() {
let v = vec_with_closure(Box::new(|t: usize| {
println!("{}", t);
}));
for c in v.iter_mut() {
c(10);
}
}
EDIT 2:
Using Rc<RefCell<...>> together with move || and the Fn() trait as opposed to the FnMut()m as suggested by Shepmaster, helped me produce a working version of the above code. Rust playpen version here.
Here's my understanding of the problem, slightly slimmed down:
fn filter<F>(&mut self, f: F) -> Keeper
where F: Fn() -> bool + 'static //'
{
let mut k = Keeper::new();
self.subscribe(|| {
if f() { k.publish() }
});
k
}
In this method, f is a value that has been passed in by-value, which means that filter owns it. Then, we create another closure that captures f by-reference. We are then trying to save that closure somewhere, so all the references in the closure need to outlive the lifetime of our struct (I picked 'static for convenience).
However, f only lives until the end of the method, so it definitely won't live long enough. We need to make the closure own f. It would be ideal if we could use the move keyword, but that causes the closure to also move in k, so we wouldn't be able to return it from the function.
Trying to solve that led to this version:
fn filter<F>(&mut self, f: F) -> Keeper
where F: Fn() -> bool + 'static //'
{
let mut k = Keeper::new();
let k2 = &mut k;
self.subscribe(move || {
if f() { k2.publish() }
});
k
}
which has a useful error message:
error: `k` does not live long enough
let k2 = &mut k;
^
note: reference must be valid for the static lifetime...
...but borrowed value is only valid for the block
Which leads to another problem: you are trying to keep a reference to k in the closure, but that reference will become invalid as soon as k is returned from the function. When items are moved by-value, their address will change, so references are no longer valid.
One potential solution is to use Rc and RefCell:
fn filter<F>(&mut self, f: F) -> Rc<RefCell<Keeper>>
where F: Fn() -> bool + 'static //'
{
let mut k = Rc::new(RefCell::new(Keeper::new()));
let k2 = k.clone();
self.subscribe(move || {
if f() { k2.borrow_mut().publish() }
});
k
}

How do I store a closure in a struct in Rust?

Before Rust 1.0, I could write a structure using this obsolete closure syntax:
struct Foo {
pub foo: |usize| -> usize,
}
Now I can do something like:
struct Foo<F: FnMut(usize) -> usize> {
pub foo: F,
}
But then what's the type of a Foo object I create?
let foo: Foo<???> = Foo { foo: |x| x + 1 };
I could also use a reference:
struct Foo<'a> {
pub foo: &'a mut FnMut(usize) -> usize,
}
I think this is slower because
the pointer dereference
there's no specialization for the type of FnMut that actually ends up being used
Complementing the existing answer with some more code for demonstration purposes:
Unboxed closure
Use a generic type:
struct Foo<F>
where
F: Fn(usize) -> usize,
{
pub foo: F,
}
impl<F> Foo<F>
where
F: Fn(usize) -> usize,
{
fn new(foo: F) -> Self {
Self { foo }
}
}
fn main() {
let foo = Foo { foo: |a| a + 1 };
(foo.foo)(42);
(Foo::new(|a| a + 1).foo)(42);
}
Boxed trait object
struct Foo {
pub foo: Box<dyn Fn(usize) -> usize>,
}
impl Foo {
fn new(foo: impl Fn(usize) -> usize + 'static) -> Self {
Self { foo: Box::new(foo) }
}
}
fn main() {
let foo = Foo {
foo: Box::new(|a| a + 1),
};
(foo.foo)(42);
(Foo::new(|a| a + 1).foo)(42);
}
Trait object reference
struct Foo<'a> {
pub foo: &'a dyn Fn(usize) -> usize,
}
impl<'a> Foo<'a> {
fn new(foo: &'a dyn Fn(usize) -> usize) -> Self {
Self { foo }
}
}
fn main() {
let foo = Foo { foo: &|a| a + 1 };
(foo.foo)(42);
(Foo::new(&|a| a + 1).foo)(42);
}
Function pointer
struct Foo {
pub foo: fn(usize) -> usize,
}
impl Foo {
fn new(foo: fn(usize) -> usize) -> Self {
Self { foo }
}
}
fn main() {
let foo = Foo { foo: |a| a + 1 };
(foo.foo)(42);
(Foo::new(|a| a + 1).foo)(42);
}
what's the type of a Foo object I create?
It's an unnameable, automatically generated type.
I could also use a reference [...] slower because [...] the pointer deref [...] no specialization
Perhaps, but it can be much easier on the caller.
See also:
How do I call a function through a member variable?
Returning a closure from a function
How to return an anonymous type from a trait method without using Box?
Closures as a type in a Rust struct
Types of unboxed closures being unique to each
Why does passing a closure to function which accepts a function pointer not work?
What does "dyn" mean in a type?
For what type you'd use in your third code snippet, there isn't one; closure types are anonymous and cannot be directly named. Instead, you'd write:
let foo = Foo { foo: |x| x + 1 };
If you're writing code in a context where you need to specify that you want a Foo, you'd write:
let foo: Foo<_> = Foo { foo: |x| x + 1 };
The _ tells the type system to infer the actual generic type for you.
The general rule of thumb as to which to use, in descending order:
Generic parameters: struct Foo<F: FnMut(usize) -> usize>. This is the most efficient, but it does mean that a specific Foo instance can only ever store one closure, since every closure has a different concrete type.
Trait references: &'a mut dyn FnMut(usize) -> usize. There's a pointer indirection, but now you can store a reference to any closure that has a compatible call signature.
Boxed closures: Box<dyn FnMut(usize) -> usize>. This involves allocating the closure on the heap, but you don't have to worry about lifetimes. As with a reference, you can store any closure with a compatible signature.
Before Rust 1.0
Closures that used the || syntax were references to closures stored on the stack, making them equivalent to &'a mut FnMut(usize) -> usize. Old-style procs were heap-allocated and were equivalent to Box<dyn FnOnce(usize) -> usize> (you can only call a proc once).

Resources