Why center printing doesn't work upon custom struct? [duplicate] - rust

This question already has an answer here:
Why is the width ignored for my custom formatter implementation?
(1 answer)
Closed 19 days ago.
First I write a struct:
struct sdt {
name: String,
sex: bool
}
Then impl Display for it:
impl Display for sdt {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut Formatter<'_>) -> std::fmt::Result {
write!(f, "<{}, {}>", self.name, self.sex)
}
}
Now I want to print it centered as below:
fn main() {
println!("{:^30}", "hello world!");
let s = sdt {
name: String::from("cheng-min"),
sex: false
};
println!("{:^30}", s)
}
But It's output is:
output
Could you please tell me what happened and how to resolve this problem?

The format specifiers don't do any work on their own. They get passed to the Formatter object you call f in your Display implementation, and your function can do with them what it pleases.
For instance, to pad the resulting output to the given width (like many built-in types do), use Formatter::pad
impl Display for sdt {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut Formatter<'_>) -> std::fmt::Result {
f.pad(&format!("<{}, {}>", self.name, self.sex))
}
}

Related

How to access the value of a field in a tracing span?

I'm using the tracing library in my project and there is one thing I'm not able to figure out: How can I access a value (that I set in my span when I create it) in my Layer?
My layer looks like this:
impl<S> Layer<S> for CustomLayer where S: Subscriber {
fn register_callsite(&self, metadata: &'static Metadata<'static>) -> Interest {
Interest::sometimes() //hardcoding so enabled() will be called everytime a span is created
}
fn enabled(&self, metadata: &Metadata<'_>, ctx: Context<'_, S>) -> bool {
if metadata.is_span() {
// How do I access value of key here?
if value == X {
true
} else if value == Y {
false
}
}
true // default
}
}
You can access the data in a Span if you have access to either its ValueSet (as found in new_span() or on_new_span() via Attributes) or a Record entry for it (as found in record() or on_record()). With that you can use the visitor pattern to find the information you desire. Here's a simple implementation that checks if a field exists and its value is a matching string:
use std::fmt::Debug;
use tracing::field::{ValueSet, Visit, Field};
use tracing::span::Record;
struct MatchStrVisitor<'a> {
field: &'a str,
value: &'a str,
matched: bool,
}
impl Visit for MatchStrVisitor<'_> {
fn record_debug(&mut self, _field: &Field, _value: &dyn Debug) {}
fn record_str(&mut self, field: &Field, value: &str) {
if field.name() == self.field && value == self.value {
self.matched = true;
}
}
}
fn value_in_valueset(valueset: &ValueSet<'_>, field: &str, value: &str) -> bool {
let mut visitor = MatchStrVisitor { field, value, matched: false };
valueset.record(&mut visitor);
visitor.matched
}
fn value_in_record(record: &Record<'_>, field: &str, value: &str) -> bool {
let mut visitor = MatchStrVisitor { field, value, matched: false };
record.record(&mut visitor);
visitor.matched
}
This is pretty rudimentary but hopefully demonstrates what is possible. One thing to note is that the "value" that is stored is either a primitive value (i64, u64, bool, str, etc.) or in a type-erased form via &dyn Debug. Those are the only types of values you can receive from the visitor.
Addressing OP's case in particular, as explained in this issue you cannot access this information in the enabled() method since that occurs before any values are recorded. You will need to make your determination in the new_span() method, and use span extensions via the registry to track whether you consider the span is "enabled" in your other methods.
Here's another rudimentary example:
use tracing::span::Attributes;
use tracing::{Subscriber, Metadata, Id, Event};
use tracing::subscriber::Interest;
use tracing_subscriber::layer::{Context, Layer};
use tracing_subscriber::registry::LookupSpan;
struct CustomLayer;
struct CustomLayerEnabled;
impl<S> Layer<S> for CustomLayer where S: Subscriber + for <'a> LookupSpan<'a> {
fn register_callsite(&self, _metadata: &'static Metadata<'static>) -> Interest {
Interest::sometimes()
}
fn enabled(&self, metadata: &Metadata<'_>, _ctx: Context<'_, S>) -> bool {
metadata.is_span()
}
fn on_new_span(&self, attrs: &Attributes<'_>, id: &Id, ctx: Context<'_, S>) {
if value_in_valueset(attrs.values(), "myfield", "myvalue") {
ctx.span(id).unwrap().extensions_mut().insert(CustomLayerEnabled);
}
}
fn on_event(&self, event: &Event<'_>, ctx: Context<'_, S>) {
let span_id = event.parent().unwrap();
if let None = ctx.span(span_id).unwrap().extensions().get::<CustomLayerEnabled>() {
return;
}
// ... rest of your logic
}
}
Note: I've completely rewritten this answer taking info from the comments and my newfound experience.

Rust creating String with pointer offset

So let's say I have a String, "Foo Bar" and I want to create a substring of "Bar" without allocating new memory.
So I moved the raw pointer of the original string to the start of the substring (in this case offsetting it by 4) and use the String::from_raw_parts() function to create the String.
So far I have the following code, which as far as I understand should do this just fine. I just don't understand why this does not work.
use std::mem;
fn main() {
let s = String::from("Foo Bar");
let ptr = s.as_ptr();
mem::forget(s);
unsafe {
// no error when using ptr.add(0)
let txt = String::from_raw_parts(ptr.add(4) as *mut _, 3, 3);
println!("{:?}", txt); // This even prints "Bar" but crashes afterwards
println!("prints because 'txt' is still in scope");
}
println!("won't print because 'txt' was dropped",)
}
I get the following error on Windows:
error: process didn't exit successfully: `target\debug\main.exe` (exit code: 0xc0000374, STATUS_HEAP_CORRUPTION)
And these on Linux (cargo run; cargo run --release):
munmap_chunk(): invalid pointer
free(): invalid pointer
I think it has something to do with the destructor of String, because as long as txt is in scope the program runs just fine.
Another thing to notice is that when I use ptr.add(0) instead of ptr.add(4) it runs without an error.
Creating a slice didn't give me any problems on the other Hand. Dropping that worked just fine.
let t = slice::from_raw_parts(ptr.add(4), 3);
In the end I want to split an owned String in place into multiple owned Strings without allocating new memory.
Any help is appreciated.
The reason for the errors is the way that the allocator works. It is Undefined Behaviour to ask the allocator to free a pointer that it didn't give you in the first place. In this case, the allocator allocated 7 bytes for s and returned a pointer to the first one. However, when txt is dropped, it tells the allocator to deallocate a pointer to byte 4, which it has never seen before. This is why there is no issue when you add(0) instead of add(4).
Using unsafe correctly is hard, and you should avoid it where possible.
Part of the purpose of the &str type is to allow portions of an owned string to be shared, so I would strongly encourage you to use those if you can.
If the reason you can't just use &str on its own is because you aren't able to track the lifetimes back to the original String, then there are still some solutions, with different trade-offs:
Leak the memory, so it's effectively static:
let mut s = String::from("Foo Bar");
let s = Box::leak(s.into_boxed_str());
let txt: &'static str = &s[4..];
let s: &'static str = &s[..4];
Obviously, you can only do this a few times in your application, or else you are going to use up too much memory that you can't get back.
Use reference-counting to make sure that the original String stays around long enough for all of the slices to remain valid. Here is a sketch solution:
use std::{fmt, ops::Deref, rc::Rc};
struct RcStr {
rc: Rc<String>,
start: usize,
len: usize,
}
impl RcStr {
fn from_rc_string(rc: Rc<String>, start: usize, len: usize) -> Self {
RcStr { rc, start, len }
}
fn as_str(&self) -> &str {
&self.rc[self.start..self.start + self.len]
}
}
impl Deref for RcStr {
type Target = str;
fn deref(&self) -> &str {
self.as_str()
}
}
impl fmt::Display for RcStr {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
fmt::Display::fmt(self.as_str(), f)
}
}
impl fmt::Debug for RcStr {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
fmt::Debug::fmt(self.as_str(), f)
}
}
fn main() {
let s = Rc::new(String::from("Foo Bar"));
let txt = RcStr::from_rc_string(Rc::clone(&s), 4, 3);
let s = RcStr::from_rc_string(Rc::clone(&s), 0, 4);
println!("{:?}", txt); // "Bar"
println!("{:?}", s); // "Foo "
}

Create an iterator and put it into a new struct without bothering the borrow-checker [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
Is there any way to return a reference to a variable created in a function?
(5 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
I am trying to create a lexical analyzer which uses itertools::PutBack to make an iterator over the characters in a String. I intend to store the pushback iterator in a struct and delegate methods to it so that I can categorize the characters by an enum, which will then be passed to a state machine at the core of the lexical analyzer (not yet written).
The borrow-checker is not happy with me. Method ParserEventIterator::new near the bottom of the listing causes the error. How do I define the lifetimes or borrowing so that I can get this to compile? Or what Rustic data structure design should I use in its stead?
Ultimately, I would like this to implement the appropriate traits to become a proper iterator. (Newbie to Rust. Prior to this, I have programmed in 28 languages, but this one has me stumped.)
Here is a code sample:
extern crate itertools;
use itertools::put_back;
use std::fmt::Display;
use std::fmt::Formatter;
use std::fmt::Result;
pub enum ParserEvent {
Letter(char),
Digit(char),
Other(char),
}
impl ParserEvent {
fn new(c: char) -> ParserEvent {
match c {
'a'...'z' | 'A'...'Z' => ParserEvent::Letter(c),
'0'...'9' => ParserEvent::Digit(c),
_ => ParserEvent::Other(c),
}
}
}
impl Display for ParserEvent {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut Formatter) -> Result {
let mut _ctos = |c: char| write!(f, "{}", c.to_string());
match self {
ParserEvent::Letter(letter) => _ctos(*letter),
ParserEvent::Digit(digit) => _ctos(*digit),
ParserEvent::Other(o) => _ctos(*o),
}
}
}
// ParserEventIterator
// Elements ('e) must have lifetime longer than the iterator ('i).
pub struct ParserEventIterator<'i, 'e: 'i> {
char_iter: &'i mut itertools::PutBack<std::str::Chars<'e>>,
}
impl<'i, 'e: 'i> ParserEventIterator<'i, 'e> {
fn new(s: &'e std::string::String) -> ParserEventIterator<'i, 'e> {
// THIS NEXT LINE IS THE LINE WITH THE PROBLEM!!!
ParserEventIterator {
char_iter: &mut put_back(s.chars()),
}
}
fn put_back(&mut self, e: ParserEvent) -> () {
if let Some(c) = e.to_string().chars().next() {
self.char_iter.put_back(c);
}
}
}
impl<'i, 'e: 'i> Iterator for ParserEventIterator<'i, 'e> {
type Item = ParserEvent;
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<ParserEvent> {
match self.char_iter.next() {
Some(c) => Some(ParserEvent::new(c)),
None => None,
}
}
}
fn main() {
let mut _i = ParserEventIterator::new(&String::from("Hello World"));
}
On the Rust Playground
error[E0515]: cannot return value referencing temporary value
--> src/main.rs:43:9
|
43 | / ParserEventIterator {
44 | | char_iter: &mut put_back(s.chars()),
| | ------------------- temporary value created here
45 | | }
| |_________^ returns a value referencing data owned by the current function
Well, the compiler is almost telling you the solution by reflecting to the obvious problem: you can't have a borrow which doesn't live long enough, i.e. the borrow would point to a nonexistent location after the stack memory of the function has been destroyed.
This would happen because the borrow is referencing an object (in this case an itertools::struct::PutBack instance) that has been newly created within the function body. This instance gets destroyed at the end of the function along with all the references to it. So the compiler is preventing you to have a so called dangling pointer.
Thus, instead of borrowing you should move the PutBack instance into your struct:
// ...
pub struct ParserEventIterator<'e> {
char_iter: itertools::PutBack<std::str::Chars<'e>>
}
impl<'e> ParserEventIterator<'e> {
fn new(s: &'e std::string::String) -> ParserEventIterator<'e> {
ParserEventIterator { char_iter: put_back(s.chars()) }
}
// ...
}

Verify that method was called the expected number of times with correct parameters [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
How to check if a function has been called in Rust?
(2 answers)
How to mock specific methods but not all of them in Rust?
(2 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
Summary
I have an application that starts another process and transfers its StdOut/StdErr to a log file using the log crate. My application transfers the output line by line (buf_read.read_line()). As it can be any arbitrary process, my application makes the assumption that the other process may be malicious and may try to print to stdout/sterr enormous amounts of data without a single newline, thus causing OOM in my application. Hence my application limits the number of bytes the BufReader can read at a time using BufReader.take().
The problem
Ignoring all the details about chunking the input, how can I test that my logger was called X times with the correct parameters ? Let's assume my app has read one huge line and has split it in 3 parts like the MCVE below.
MCVE:
use std::thread::JoinHandle;
fn main() {
let handle = start_transfer_thread(&|x| {
println!("X={}", x);
}).join();
}
fn start_transfer_thread<F>(logger: &'static F) -> JoinHandle<()> where F: Send + Sync + Fn(&str) -> () {
std::thread::spawn(move || {
logger("1");
logger("2");
logger("3");
})
}
#[cfg(test)]
mod test {
use super::*;
#[test]
fn test_logged_in_order() {
let result = start_transfer_thread(&|x| {
match x {
"1" => (),
"2" => (),
"3" => (),
x => panic!("unexpected token: {}", x)
}
}).join();
assert!(result.is_ok());
}
}
I was able to do this by replacing the function/closure with a trait object:
trait Logger: Send + Sync {
fn log(&mut self, log_name: &str, data: &str);
}
struct StandardLogger;
impl Logger for StandardLogger {
fn log(&mut self, log_name: &str, data: &str) {
log::logger().log(
&log::Record::builder()
.level(log::Level::Info)
.target(log_name)
.args(format_args!("{}", data))
.build(),
);
}
}
For the tests I use another implementation:
struct DummyLogger {
tx: Mutex<Sender<String>>,
}
impl DummyLogger {
pub fn new() -> (DummyLogger, Receiver<String>) {
let (tx, rx) = std::sync::mpsc::channel();
let logger = DummyLogger { tx: Mutex::new(tx) };
(logger, rx)
}
}
impl Logger for DummyLogger {
fn log(&mut self, log_name: &str, data: &str) {
let tx = self.tx.lock().unwrap();
tx.send(data.to_owned());
}
}
Which allows me to verify that it was both called the correct number of times, with the correct parameters:
let actual: Vec<String> = rx.iter().collect();
assert_eq!(actual, vec!["1", "2", "3", "4"]);

What's the most idiomatic way of working with an Iterator of Results? [duplicate]

This question already has answers here:
How do I stop iteration and return an error when Iterator::map returns a Result::Err?
(4 answers)
Closed 3 years ago.
I have code like this:
let things = vec![/* ...*/]; // e.g. Vec<String>
things
.map(|thing| {
let a = try!(do_stuff(thing));
Ok(other_stuff(a))
})
.filter(|thing_result| match *thing_result {
Err(e) => true,
Ok(a) => check(a),
})
.map(|thing_result| {
let a = try!(thing_result);
// do stuff
b
})
.collect::<Result<Vec<_>, _>>()
In terms of semantics, I want to stop processing after the first error.
The above code works, but it feels quite cumbersome. Is there a better way? I've looked through the docs for something like filter_if_ok, but I haven't found anything.
I am aware of collect::<Result<Vec<_>, _>>, and it works great. I'm specifically trying to eliminate the following boilerplate:
In the filter's closure, I have to use match on thing_result. I feel like this should just be a one-liner, e.g. .filter_if_ok(|thing| check(a)).
Every time I use map, I have to include an extra statement let a = try!(thing_result); in order to deal with the possibility of an Err. Again, I feel like this could be abstracted away into .map_if_ok(|thing| ...).
Is there another approach I can use to get this level of conciseness, or do I just need to tough it out?
There are lots of ways you could mean this.
If you just want to panic, use .map(|x| x.unwrap()).
If you want all results or a single error, collect into a Result<X<T>>:
let results: Result<Vec<i32>, _> = result_i32_iter.collect();
If you want everything except the errors, use .filter_map(|x| x.ok()) or .flat_map(|x| x).
If you want everything up to the first error, use .scan((), |_, x| x.ok()).
let results: Vec<i32> = result_i32_iter.scan((), |_, x| x.ok());
Note that these operations can be combined with earlier operations in many cases.
Since Rust 1.27, Iterator::try_for_each could be of interest:
An iterator method that applies a fallible function to each item in the iterator, stopping at the first error and returning that error.
This can also be thought of as the fallible form of for_each() or as the stateless version of try_fold().
You can implement these iterators yourself. See how filter and map are implemented in the standard library.
map_ok implementation:
#[derive(Clone)]
pub struct MapOkIterator<I, F> {
iter: I,
f: F,
}
impl<A, B, E, I, F> Iterator for MapOkIterator<I, F>
where
F: FnMut(A) -> B,
I: Iterator<Item = Result<A, E>>,
{
type Item = Result<B, E>;
#[inline]
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<Self::Item> {
self.iter.next().map(|x| x.map(&mut self.f))
}
}
pub trait MapOkTrait {
fn map_ok<F, A, B, E>(self, func: F) -> MapOkIterator<Self, F>
where
Self: Sized + Iterator<Item = Result<A, E>>,
F: FnMut(A) -> B,
{
MapOkIterator {
iter: self,
f: func,
}
}
}
impl<I, T, E> MapOkTrait for I
where
I: Sized + Iterator<Item = Result<T, E>>,
{
}
filter_ok is almost the same:
#[derive(Clone)]
pub struct FilterOkIterator<I, P> {
iter: I,
predicate: P,
}
impl<I, P, A, E> Iterator for FilterOkIterator<I, P>
where
P: FnMut(&A) -> bool,
I: Iterator<Item = Result<A, E>>,
{
type Item = Result<A, E>;
#[inline]
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<Result<A, E>> {
for x in self.iter.by_ref() {
match x {
Ok(xx) => if (self.predicate)(&xx) {
return Some(Ok(xx));
},
Err(_) => return Some(x),
}
}
None
}
}
pub trait FilterOkTrait {
fn filter_ok<P, A, E>(self, predicate: P) -> FilterOkIterator<Self, P>
where
Self: Sized + Iterator<Item = Result<A, E>>,
P: FnMut(&A) -> bool,
{
FilterOkIterator {
iter: self,
predicate: predicate,
}
}
}
impl<I, T, E> FilterOkTrait for I
where
I: Sized + Iterator<Item = Result<T, E>>,
{
}
Your code may look like this:
["1", "2", "3", "4"]
.iter()
.map(|x| x.parse::<u16>().map(|a| a + 10))
.filter_ok(|x| x % 2 == 0)
.map_ok(|x| x + 100)
.collect::<Result<Vec<_>, std::num::ParseIntError>>()
playground
filter_map can be used to reduce simple cases of mapping then filtering. In your example there is some logic to the filter so I don't think it simplifies things. I don't see any useful functions in the documentation for Result either unfortunately. I think your example is as idiomatic as it could get, but here are some small improvements:
let things = vec![...]; // e.g. Vec<String>
things.iter().map(|thing| {
// The ? operator can be used in place of try! in the nightly version of Rust
let a = do_stuff(thing)?;
Ok(other_stuff(a))
// The closure braces can be removed if the code is a single expression
}).filter(|thing_result| match *thing_result {
Err(e) => true,
Ok(a) => check(a),
}
).map(|thing_result| {
let a = thing_result?;
// do stuff
b
})
The ? operator can be less readable in some cases, so you might not want to use it.
If you are able to change the check function to return Some(x) instead of true, and None instead of false, you can use filter_map:
let bar = things.iter().filter_map(|thing| {
match do_stuff(thing) {
Err(e) => Some(Err(e)),
Ok(a) => {
let x = other_stuff(a);
if check_2(x) {
Some(Ok(x))
} else {
None
}
}
}
}).map(|thing_result| {
let a = try!(thing_result);
// do stuff
b
}).collect::<Result<Vec<_>, _>>();
You can get rid of the let a = try!(thing); by using a match in some cases as well. However, using filter_map here doesn't seem to help.

Resources