Proposal
Problem statement
ACP #589 (tracked at rust-lang/rust#148768) introduced two new traits:
// core::ops
// Implemented only for function pointers.
pub unsafe trait FnPtr {
fn addr(self) -> usize;
fn as_ptr(self) -> NonNull<Code>;
unsafe fn from_ptr(NonNull<Code>) -> Self;
}
// Implemented for all types that coerce to function pointers.
pub unsafe trait FnStatic<Args>: Fn<Args> {
type FnPtr: FnPtr;
fn as_fn() -> Self::FnPtr;
fn addr() -> usize;
fn as_ptr() -> NonNull<Code>;
extern "rust-call" fn call_static(args: Args) -> Self::Output;
}
They share some functionality that can be refactored into a separate trait that could be used for both function pointers and types which coerce to them (function definitions and closures without captures), but can't be since the traits are mutually exclusive.
Motivating examples or use cases
See ACP #836 that would like to be able to get an address of both function pointers and function definitions.
Solution sketch
Add a new trait with the shared functionality:
// Implemented for function pointers and types that coerce to function pointers
pub unsafe trait FnAddr {
fn addr(self) -> usize;
fn as_ptr(self) -> NonNull<Code>;
}
And then use it as the super trait of both FnStatic and FnPtr:
// Implemented only for function pointers.
-pub unsafe trait FnPtr {
+pub unsafe trait FnPtr: FnAddr {
- fn addr(self) -> usize;
- fn as_ptr(self) -> NonNull<Code>;
unsafe fn from_ptr(NonNull<Code>) -> Self;
}
// Implemented for all types that coerce to function pointers.
-pub unsafe trait FnStatic<Args>: Fn<Args> {
+pub unsafe trait FnStatic<Args>: Fn<Args> + FnAddr {
type FnPtr: FnPtr;
fn as_fn() -> Self::FnPtr;
- fn addr() -> usize;
- fn as_ptr() -> NonNull<Code>;
extern "rust-call" fn call_static(args: Args) -> Self::Output;
}
Alternatives
Links and related work
What happens now?
This issue contains an API change proposal (or ACP) and is part of the libs-api team feature lifecycle. Once this issue is filed, the libs-api team will review open proposals as capability becomes available. Current response times do not have a clear estimate, but may be up to several months.
Possible responses
The libs team may respond in various different ways. First, the team will consider the problem (this doesn't require any concrete solution or alternatives to have been proposed):
- We think this problem seems worth solving, and the standard library might be the right place to solve it.
- We think that this probably doesn't belong in the standard library.
Second, if there's a concrete solution:
- We think this specific solution looks roughly right, approved, you or someone else should implement this. (Further review will still happen on the subsequent implementation PR.)
- We're not sure this is the right solution, and the alternatives or other materials don't give us enough information to be sure about that. Here are some questions we have that aren't answered, or rough ideas about alternatives we'd want to see discussed.
Proposal
Problem statement
ACP #589 (tracked at rust-lang/rust#148768) introduced two new traits:
They share some functionality that can be refactored into a separate trait that could be used for both function pointers and types which coerce to them (function definitions and closures without captures), but can't be since the traits are mutually exclusive.
Motivating examples or use cases
See ACP #836 that would like to be able to get an address of both function pointers and function definitions.
Solution sketch
Add a new trait with the shared functionality:
And then use it as the super trait of both
FnStaticandFnPtr:Alternatives
Links and related work
FnStaticandFnPtr::addr/from_ptr/as_ptrandCoderust#148768 / API for explicitly getting an opaque pointer of a function #589ptr::fn_addr#836What happens now?
This issue contains an API change proposal (or ACP) and is part of the libs-api team feature lifecycle. Once this issue is filed, the libs-api team will review open proposals as capability becomes available. Current response times do not have a clear estimate, but may be up to several months.
Possible responses
The libs team may respond in various different ways. First, the team will consider the problem (this doesn't require any concrete solution or alternatives to have been proposed):
Second, if there's a concrete solution: