Skip to content

Conversation

matklad
Copy link
Member

@matklad matklad commented Aug 31, 2020

See
https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/need-for-controlling-drop-order-of-fields/12914/21
for the discussion.

TL;DR: ManuallyDrop is unsafe and footguny, but you can just ask the compiler to do all the work for you by re-ordering declarations.

Specifically, the original example from the docs is much better written as

struct Peach;
struct Banana;
struct Melon;
struct FruitBox {
    melon: Melon,
    // XXX: mind the relative drop order of the fields below
    peach: Peach,
    banana: Banana,
}

@matklad matklad added the T-libs-api Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue. label Aug 31, 2020
@rust-highfive
Copy link
Contributor

r? @withoutboats

(rust_highfive has picked a reviewer for you, use r? to override)

@rust-highfive rust-highfive added the S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Aug 31, 2020
@crlf0710
Copy link
Member

r? @dtolnay

@withoutboats
Copy link
Contributor

I agree with this change to the guideline. I don't know if these docs date to before we had agreed to define the drop order or not.

I would like the documentation to briefly explain the defined drop order of struct fields, though, and maybe the code sample using that to get a certain drop order. I know its contained in the associated link, but it would make the documentation clearer here.

See
https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/need-for-controlling-drop-order-of-fields/12914/21
for the discussion.

TL;DR: ManuallyDrop is unsafe and footguny, but you can just ask the
compiler to do all the work for you by re-ordering declarations.
@matklad
Copy link
Member Author

matklad commented Sep 21, 2020

Yeah, that would be helpful, included an example!

@RalfJung
Copy link
Member

r=me unless you want another review.

@withoutboats
Copy link
Contributor

@bors r+ looks good!

@bors
Copy link
Collaborator

bors commented Sep 21, 2020

📌 Commit 60b102d has been approved by withoutboats

@bors bors added S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: Awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Sep 21, 2020
@ecstatic-morse
Copy link
Contributor

@bors rollup

Dylan-DPC-zz pushed a commit to Dylan-DPC-zz/rust that referenced this pull request Sep 22, 2020
Don't recommend ManuallyDrop to customize drop order

See
https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/need-for-controlling-drop-order-of-fields/12914/21
for the discussion.

TL;DR: ManuallyDrop is unsafe and footguny, but you can just ask the compiler to do all the work for you by re-ordering declarations.

Specifically, the original example from the docs is much better written as

```rust
struct Peach;
struct Banana;
struct Melon;
struct FruitBox {
    melon: Melon,
    // XXX: mind the relative drop order of the fields below
    peach: Peach,
    banana: Banana,
}
```
ecstatic-morse added a commit to ecstatic-morse/rust that referenced this pull request Sep 22, 2020
Don't recommend ManuallyDrop to customize drop order

See
https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/need-for-controlling-drop-order-of-fields/12914/21
for the discussion.

TL;DR: ManuallyDrop is unsafe and footguny, but you can just ask the compiler to do all the work for you by re-ordering declarations.

Specifically, the original example from the docs is much better written as

```rust
struct Peach;
struct Banana;
struct Melon;
struct FruitBox {
    melon: Melon,
    // XXX: mind the relative drop order of the fields below
    peach: Peach,
    banana: Banana,
}
```
bors added a commit to rust-lang-ci/rust that referenced this pull request Sep 22, 2020
…atic-morse

Rollup of 13 pull requests

Successful merges:

 - rust-lang#72734 (Reduce duplicate in liballoc reserve error handling)
 - rust-lang#76131 (Don't use `zip` to compare iterators during pretty-print hack)
 - rust-lang#76150 (Don't recommend ManuallyDrop to customize drop order)
 - rust-lang#76275 (Implementation of Write for some immutable ref structs)
 - rust-lang#76489 (Add explanation for E0756)
 - rust-lang#76581 (do not ICE on bound variables, return `TooGeneric` instead)
 - rust-lang#76655 (Make some methods of `Pin` unstable const)
 - rust-lang#76783 (Only get ImplKind::Impl once)
 - rust-lang#76807 (Use const-checking to forbid use of unstable features in const-stable functions)
 - rust-lang#76888 (use if let instead of single match arm expressions)
 - rust-lang#76914 (extend `Ty` and `TyCtxt` lints to self types)
 - rust-lang#77022 (Reduce boilerplate for BytePos and CharPos)
 - rust-lang#77032 (lint missing docs for extern items)

Failed merges:

r? `@ghost`
@bors bors merged commit 4f3697b into rust-lang:master Sep 22, 2020
@rustbot rustbot added this to the 1.48.0 milestone Sep 22, 2020
@matklad matklad deleted the droporder branch September 25, 2020 07:48
@matklad matklad restored the droporder branch September 25, 2020 07:48
@matklad matklad deleted the droporder branch September 25, 2020 07:48
@vojtechkral
Copy link
Contributor

Reminder: Rustonomicon (still?) advises exactly the other way around 🙂

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
S-waiting-on-bors Status: Waiting on bors to run and complete tests. Bors will change the label on completion. T-libs-api Relevant to the library API team, which will review and decide on the PR/issue.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

10 participants