Why does using ? on Result<_, &str> cause a lifetime error? - rust

I have this code that doesn't compile:
impl BytePacketBuffer {
fn read(&mut self) -> Result<u8, &str> {
if self.pos >= 512 {
return Err("End of buffer".into());
}
let res = self.buf[self.pos];
self.pos += 1;
Ok(res)
}
fn read_u16(&mut self) -> Result<u16, &str> {
let res = ((self.read()? as u16) << 8) | (self.read()? as u16);
Ok(res)
}
}
error[E0499]: cannot borrow `*self` as mutable more than once at a time
--> src/byte_packet_buffer.rs:53:51
|
52 | fn read_u16(&mut self) -> Result<u16, &str> {
| - let's call the lifetime of this reference `'1`
53 | let res = ((self.read()? as u16) << 8) | (self.read()? as u16);
| ------------ ^^^^^^^^^^^ second mutable borrow occurs here
| |
| first mutable borrow occurs here
| returning this value requires that `*self` is borrowed for `'1`
But if I modify the return type from &str to String, it compiles without error. Can anybody explain why I get an error when returning &str but not when returning String?

Because you did not specify any lifetimes Rust will infer them according to the elision rules to be this:
fn read<'a>(&'a mut self) -> Result<u8, &'a str>
which means it will infer self to be borrowed for as long as you keep the Result or anything it contained around.
To fix it you could just specify the lifetime of the returned str because it's always static anyways.
fn read(&mut self) -> Result<u8, &'static str>

#cafce25 explained well how lifetime elision leads to incorrect lifetime, but this still does not explain why this fails. Even with the incorrect lifetimes, when we borrow self for the &str it is the error case, and the error case is immediately returning from the function and thus does not borrow self further.
Well, this is because the ? operators desugars roughly into (simplified, but the actual desugaring doesn't matter here):
match expr {
Ok(v) => v,
Err(e) => return Err(From::from(e)),
}
And it is well known that the borrow checker is overly conservative w.r.t. branches. It extends borrow in return expression to the rest of the function, causing the &str to live even when it cannot really live.
If you compile it with Polonius (cargo +nightly rustc -- -Zpolonius), it compiles successfully.

Related

Usage of `mut` keyword results in "lifetime may not live long enough" error, when it does [duplicate]

I have created a data structure in Rust and I want to create iterators for it. Immutable iterators are easy enough. I currently have this, and it works fine:
// This is a mock of the "real" EdgeIndexes class as
// the one in my real program is somewhat complex, but
// of identical type
struct EdgeIndexes;
impl Iterator for EdgeIndexes {
type Item = usize;
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<Self::Item> {
Some(0)
}
fn size_hint(&self) -> (usize, Option<usize>) {
(0, None)
}
}
pub struct CGraph<E> {
nodes: usize,
edges: Vec<E>,
}
pub struct Edges<'a, E: 'a> {
index: EdgeIndexes,
graph: &'a CGraph<E>,
}
impl<'a, E> Iterator for Edges<'a, E> {
type Item = &'a E;
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<Self::Item> {
match self.index.next() {
None => None,
Some(x) => Some(&self.graph.edges[x]),
}
}
fn size_hint(&self) -> (usize, Option<usize>) {
self.index.size_hint()
}
}
I want to create a iterator that returns mutable references as well. I've tried doing this, but can't find a way to get it to compile:
pub struct MutEdges<'a, E: 'a> {
index: EdgeIndexes,
graph: &'a mut CGraph<E>,
}
impl<'a, E> Iterator for MutEdges<'a, E> {
type Item = &'a mut E;
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<&'a mut E> {
match self.index.next() {
None => None,
Some(x) => self.graph.edges.get_mut(x),
}
}
fn size_hint(&self) -> (usize, Option<usize>) {
self.index.size_hint()
}
}
Compiling this results in the following error:
error[E0495]: cannot infer an appropriate lifetime for lifetime parameter in function call due to conflicting requirements
--> src/lib.rs:54:24
|
54 | Some(x) => self.graph.edges.get_mut(x),
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
note: first, the lifetime cannot outlive the anonymous lifetime #1 defined on the method body at 51:5...
--> src/lib.rs:51:5
|
51 | / fn next(&mut self) -> Option<&'a mut E> {
52 | | match self.index.next() {
53 | | None => None,
54 | | Some(x) => self.graph.edges.get_mut(x),
55 | | }
56 | | }
| |_____^
note: ...so that reference does not outlive borrowed content
--> src/lib.rs:54:24
|
54 | Some(x) => self.graph.edges.get_mut(x),
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: but, the lifetime must be valid for the lifetime 'a as defined on the impl at 48:6...
--> src/lib.rs:48:6
|
48 | impl<'a, E> Iterator for MutEdges<'a, E> {
| ^^
= note: ...so that the expression is assignable:
expected std::option::Option<&'a mut E>
found std::option::Option<&mut E>
I'm unsure how to interpret these errors and how to change my code in order to allow MutEdges to return mutable references.
Link to playground with code.
You can't compile this because mutable references are more restrictive than immutable references. A shortened version that illustrates the issue is this:
struct MutIntRef<'a> {
r: &'a mut i32
}
impl<'a> MutIntRef<'a> {
fn mut_get(&mut self) -> &'a mut i32 {
&mut *self.r
}
}
fn main() {
let mut i = 42;
let mut mir = MutIntRef { r: &mut i };
let p = mir.mut_get();
let q = mir.mut_get();
println!("{}, {}", p, q);
}
Which produces the same error:
error[E0495]: cannot infer an appropriate lifetime for borrow expression due to conflicting requirements
--> src/main.rs:7:9
|
7 | &mut *self.r
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
note: first, the lifetime cannot outlive the anonymous lifetime #1 defined on the method body at 6:5...
--> src/main.rs:6:5
|
6 | / fn mut_get(&mut self) -> &'a mut i32 {
7 | | &mut *self.r
8 | | }
| |_____^
note: ...so that reference does not outlive borrowed content
--> src/main.rs:7:9
|
7 | &mut *self.r
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: but, the lifetime must be valid for the lifetime 'a as defined on the impl at 5:6...
--> src/main.rs:5:6
|
5 | impl<'a> MutIntRef<'a> {
| ^^
note: ...so that reference does not outlive borrowed content
--> src/main.rs:7:9
|
7 | &mut *self.r
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
If we take a look at the main function, we get two mutable references called p and q that both alias the memory location of i. This is not allowed. In Rust, we can't have two mutable references that alias and are both usable. The motivation for this restriction is the observation that mutation and aliasing don't play well together with respect to memory safety. So, it's good that the compiler rejected the code. If something like this compiled, it would be easy to get all kinds of memory corruption errors.
The way Rust avoids this kind of danger is by keeping at most one mutable reference usable. So, if you want to create mutable reference to X based on a mutable reference to Y where X is owned by Y, we better make sure that as long as the reference to X exists, we can't touch the other reference to Y anymore. In Rust this is achieved through lifetimes and borrowing. The compiler considers the original reference to be borrowed in such a case and this has an effect on the lifetime parameter of the resulting reference as well. If we change
fn mut_get(&mut self) -> &'a mut i32 {
&mut *self.r
}
to
fn mut_get(&mut self) -> &mut i32 { // <-- no 'a anymore
&mut *self.r // Ok!
}
the compiler stops complaining about this get_mut function. It now returns a reference with a lifetime parameter that matches &self and not 'a anymore. This makes mut_get a function with which you "borrow" self. And that's why the compiler complains about a different location:
error[E0499]: cannot borrow `mir` as mutable more than once at a time
--> src/main.rs:15:13
|
14 | let p = mir.mut_get();
| --- first mutable borrow occurs here
15 | let q = mir.mut_get();
| ^^^ second mutable borrow occurs here
16 | println!("{}, {}", p, q);
| - first borrow later used here
Apparently, the compiler really did consider mir to be borrowed. This is good. This means that now there is only one way of reaching the memory location of i: p.
Now you may wonder: How did the standard library authors manage to write the mutable vector iterator? The answer is simple: They used unsafe code. There is no other way. The Rust compiler simply does not know that whenever you ask a mutable vector iterator for the next element, that you get a different reference every time and never the same reference twice. Of course, we know that such an iterator won't give you the same reference twice and that makes it safe to offer this kind of interface you are used to. We don't need to "freeze" such an iterator. If the references an iterator returns don't overlap, it's safe to not have to borrow the iterator for accessing an element. Internally, this is done using unsafe code (turning raw pointers into references).
The easy solution for your problem might be to rely on MutItems. This is already a library-provided mutable iterator over a vector. So, you might get away with just using that instead of your own custom type, or you could wrap it inside your custom iterator type. In case you can't do that for some reason, you would have to write your own unsafe code. And if you do so, make sure that
You don't create multiple mutable references that alias. If you did, this would violate the Rust rules and invoke undefined behavior.
You don't forget to use the PhantomData type to tell the compiler that your iterator is a reference-like type where replacing the lifetime with a longer one is not allowed and could otherwise create a dangling iterator.

Cannot infer lifetime when implementing mutable iterator [duplicate]

I have created a data structure in Rust and I want to create iterators for it. Immutable iterators are easy enough. I currently have this, and it works fine:
// This is a mock of the "real" EdgeIndexes class as
// the one in my real program is somewhat complex, but
// of identical type
struct EdgeIndexes;
impl Iterator for EdgeIndexes {
type Item = usize;
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<Self::Item> {
Some(0)
}
fn size_hint(&self) -> (usize, Option<usize>) {
(0, None)
}
}
pub struct CGraph<E> {
nodes: usize,
edges: Vec<E>,
}
pub struct Edges<'a, E: 'a> {
index: EdgeIndexes,
graph: &'a CGraph<E>,
}
impl<'a, E> Iterator for Edges<'a, E> {
type Item = &'a E;
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<Self::Item> {
match self.index.next() {
None => None,
Some(x) => Some(&self.graph.edges[x]),
}
}
fn size_hint(&self) -> (usize, Option<usize>) {
self.index.size_hint()
}
}
I want to create a iterator that returns mutable references as well. I've tried doing this, but can't find a way to get it to compile:
pub struct MutEdges<'a, E: 'a> {
index: EdgeIndexes,
graph: &'a mut CGraph<E>,
}
impl<'a, E> Iterator for MutEdges<'a, E> {
type Item = &'a mut E;
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<&'a mut E> {
match self.index.next() {
None => None,
Some(x) => self.graph.edges.get_mut(x),
}
}
fn size_hint(&self) -> (usize, Option<usize>) {
self.index.size_hint()
}
}
Compiling this results in the following error:
error[E0495]: cannot infer an appropriate lifetime for lifetime parameter in function call due to conflicting requirements
--> src/lib.rs:54:24
|
54 | Some(x) => self.graph.edges.get_mut(x),
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
note: first, the lifetime cannot outlive the anonymous lifetime #1 defined on the method body at 51:5...
--> src/lib.rs:51:5
|
51 | / fn next(&mut self) -> Option<&'a mut E> {
52 | | match self.index.next() {
53 | | None => None,
54 | | Some(x) => self.graph.edges.get_mut(x),
55 | | }
56 | | }
| |_____^
note: ...so that reference does not outlive borrowed content
--> src/lib.rs:54:24
|
54 | Some(x) => self.graph.edges.get_mut(x),
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: but, the lifetime must be valid for the lifetime 'a as defined on the impl at 48:6...
--> src/lib.rs:48:6
|
48 | impl<'a, E> Iterator for MutEdges<'a, E> {
| ^^
= note: ...so that the expression is assignable:
expected std::option::Option<&'a mut E>
found std::option::Option<&mut E>
I'm unsure how to interpret these errors and how to change my code in order to allow MutEdges to return mutable references.
Link to playground with code.
You can't compile this because mutable references are more restrictive than immutable references. A shortened version that illustrates the issue is this:
struct MutIntRef<'a> {
r: &'a mut i32
}
impl<'a> MutIntRef<'a> {
fn mut_get(&mut self) -> &'a mut i32 {
&mut *self.r
}
}
fn main() {
let mut i = 42;
let mut mir = MutIntRef { r: &mut i };
let p = mir.mut_get();
let q = mir.mut_get();
println!("{}, {}", p, q);
}
Which produces the same error:
error[E0495]: cannot infer an appropriate lifetime for borrow expression due to conflicting requirements
--> src/main.rs:7:9
|
7 | &mut *self.r
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
note: first, the lifetime cannot outlive the anonymous lifetime #1 defined on the method body at 6:5...
--> src/main.rs:6:5
|
6 | / fn mut_get(&mut self) -> &'a mut i32 {
7 | | &mut *self.r
8 | | }
| |_____^
note: ...so that reference does not outlive borrowed content
--> src/main.rs:7:9
|
7 | &mut *self.r
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: but, the lifetime must be valid for the lifetime 'a as defined on the impl at 5:6...
--> src/main.rs:5:6
|
5 | impl<'a> MutIntRef<'a> {
| ^^
note: ...so that reference does not outlive borrowed content
--> src/main.rs:7:9
|
7 | &mut *self.r
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
If we take a look at the main function, we get two mutable references called p and q that both alias the memory location of i. This is not allowed. In Rust, we can't have two mutable references that alias and are both usable. The motivation for this restriction is the observation that mutation and aliasing don't play well together with respect to memory safety. So, it's good that the compiler rejected the code. If something like this compiled, it would be easy to get all kinds of memory corruption errors.
The way Rust avoids this kind of danger is by keeping at most one mutable reference usable. So, if you want to create mutable reference to X based on a mutable reference to Y where X is owned by Y, we better make sure that as long as the reference to X exists, we can't touch the other reference to Y anymore. In Rust this is achieved through lifetimes and borrowing. The compiler considers the original reference to be borrowed in such a case and this has an effect on the lifetime parameter of the resulting reference as well. If we change
fn mut_get(&mut self) -> &'a mut i32 {
&mut *self.r
}
to
fn mut_get(&mut self) -> &mut i32 { // <-- no 'a anymore
&mut *self.r // Ok!
}
the compiler stops complaining about this get_mut function. It now returns a reference with a lifetime parameter that matches &self and not 'a anymore. This makes mut_get a function with which you "borrow" self. And that's why the compiler complains about a different location:
error[E0499]: cannot borrow `mir` as mutable more than once at a time
--> src/main.rs:15:13
|
14 | let p = mir.mut_get();
| --- first mutable borrow occurs here
15 | let q = mir.mut_get();
| ^^^ second mutable borrow occurs here
16 | println!("{}, {}", p, q);
| - first borrow later used here
Apparently, the compiler really did consider mir to be borrowed. This is good. This means that now there is only one way of reaching the memory location of i: p.
Now you may wonder: How did the standard library authors manage to write the mutable vector iterator? The answer is simple: They used unsafe code. There is no other way. The Rust compiler simply does not know that whenever you ask a mutable vector iterator for the next element, that you get a different reference every time and never the same reference twice. Of course, we know that such an iterator won't give you the same reference twice and that makes it safe to offer this kind of interface you are used to. We don't need to "freeze" such an iterator. If the references an iterator returns don't overlap, it's safe to not have to borrow the iterator for accessing an element. Internally, this is done using unsafe code (turning raw pointers into references).
The easy solution for your problem might be to rely on MutItems. This is already a library-provided mutable iterator over a vector. So, you might get away with just using that instead of your own custom type, or you could wrap it inside your custom iterator type. In case you can't do that for some reason, you would have to write your own unsafe code. And if you do so, make sure that
You don't create multiple mutable references that alias. If you did, this would violate the Rust rules and invoke undefined behavior.
You don't forget to use the PhantomData type to tell the compiler that your iterator is a reference-like type where replacing the lifetime with a longer one is not allowed and could otherwise create a dangling iterator.

Why doesn't Rust let you use the innermost lifetime of nested mutable references? [duplicate]

I have created a data structure in Rust and I want to create iterators for it. Immutable iterators are easy enough. I currently have this, and it works fine:
// This is a mock of the "real" EdgeIndexes class as
// the one in my real program is somewhat complex, but
// of identical type
struct EdgeIndexes;
impl Iterator for EdgeIndexes {
type Item = usize;
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<Self::Item> {
Some(0)
}
fn size_hint(&self) -> (usize, Option<usize>) {
(0, None)
}
}
pub struct CGraph<E> {
nodes: usize,
edges: Vec<E>,
}
pub struct Edges<'a, E: 'a> {
index: EdgeIndexes,
graph: &'a CGraph<E>,
}
impl<'a, E> Iterator for Edges<'a, E> {
type Item = &'a E;
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<Self::Item> {
match self.index.next() {
None => None,
Some(x) => Some(&self.graph.edges[x]),
}
}
fn size_hint(&self) -> (usize, Option<usize>) {
self.index.size_hint()
}
}
I want to create a iterator that returns mutable references as well. I've tried doing this, but can't find a way to get it to compile:
pub struct MutEdges<'a, E: 'a> {
index: EdgeIndexes,
graph: &'a mut CGraph<E>,
}
impl<'a, E> Iterator for MutEdges<'a, E> {
type Item = &'a mut E;
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<&'a mut E> {
match self.index.next() {
None => None,
Some(x) => self.graph.edges.get_mut(x),
}
}
fn size_hint(&self) -> (usize, Option<usize>) {
self.index.size_hint()
}
}
Compiling this results in the following error:
error[E0495]: cannot infer an appropriate lifetime for lifetime parameter in function call due to conflicting requirements
--> src/lib.rs:54:24
|
54 | Some(x) => self.graph.edges.get_mut(x),
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
note: first, the lifetime cannot outlive the anonymous lifetime #1 defined on the method body at 51:5...
--> src/lib.rs:51:5
|
51 | / fn next(&mut self) -> Option<&'a mut E> {
52 | | match self.index.next() {
53 | | None => None,
54 | | Some(x) => self.graph.edges.get_mut(x),
55 | | }
56 | | }
| |_____^
note: ...so that reference does not outlive borrowed content
--> src/lib.rs:54:24
|
54 | Some(x) => self.graph.edges.get_mut(x),
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: but, the lifetime must be valid for the lifetime 'a as defined on the impl at 48:6...
--> src/lib.rs:48:6
|
48 | impl<'a, E> Iterator for MutEdges<'a, E> {
| ^^
= note: ...so that the expression is assignable:
expected std::option::Option<&'a mut E>
found std::option::Option<&mut E>
I'm unsure how to interpret these errors and how to change my code in order to allow MutEdges to return mutable references.
Link to playground with code.
You can't compile this because mutable references are more restrictive than immutable references. A shortened version that illustrates the issue is this:
struct MutIntRef<'a> {
r: &'a mut i32
}
impl<'a> MutIntRef<'a> {
fn mut_get(&mut self) -> &'a mut i32 {
&mut *self.r
}
}
fn main() {
let mut i = 42;
let mut mir = MutIntRef { r: &mut i };
let p = mir.mut_get();
let q = mir.mut_get();
println!("{}, {}", p, q);
}
Which produces the same error:
error[E0495]: cannot infer an appropriate lifetime for borrow expression due to conflicting requirements
--> src/main.rs:7:9
|
7 | &mut *self.r
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
note: first, the lifetime cannot outlive the anonymous lifetime #1 defined on the method body at 6:5...
--> src/main.rs:6:5
|
6 | / fn mut_get(&mut self) -> &'a mut i32 {
7 | | &mut *self.r
8 | | }
| |_____^
note: ...so that reference does not outlive borrowed content
--> src/main.rs:7:9
|
7 | &mut *self.r
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
note: but, the lifetime must be valid for the lifetime 'a as defined on the impl at 5:6...
--> src/main.rs:5:6
|
5 | impl<'a> MutIntRef<'a> {
| ^^
note: ...so that reference does not outlive borrowed content
--> src/main.rs:7:9
|
7 | &mut *self.r
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^
If we take a look at the main function, we get two mutable references called p and q that both alias the memory location of i. This is not allowed. In Rust, we can't have two mutable references that alias and are both usable. The motivation for this restriction is the observation that mutation and aliasing don't play well together with respect to memory safety. So, it's good that the compiler rejected the code. If something like this compiled, it would be easy to get all kinds of memory corruption errors.
The way Rust avoids this kind of danger is by keeping at most one mutable reference usable. So, if you want to create mutable reference to X based on a mutable reference to Y where X is owned by Y, we better make sure that as long as the reference to X exists, we can't touch the other reference to Y anymore. In Rust this is achieved through lifetimes and borrowing. The compiler considers the original reference to be borrowed in such a case and this has an effect on the lifetime parameter of the resulting reference as well. If we change
fn mut_get(&mut self) -> &'a mut i32 {
&mut *self.r
}
to
fn mut_get(&mut self) -> &mut i32 { // <-- no 'a anymore
&mut *self.r // Ok!
}
the compiler stops complaining about this get_mut function. It now returns a reference with a lifetime parameter that matches &self and not 'a anymore. This makes mut_get a function with which you "borrow" self. And that's why the compiler complains about a different location:
error[E0499]: cannot borrow `mir` as mutable more than once at a time
--> src/main.rs:15:13
|
14 | let p = mir.mut_get();
| --- first mutable borrow occurs here
15 | let q = mir.mut_get();
| ^^^ second mutable borrow occurs here
16 | println!("{}, {}", p, q);
| - first borrow later used here
Apparently, the compiler really did consider mir to be borrowed. This is good. This means that now there is only one way of reaching the memory location of i: p.
Now you may wonder: How did the standard library authors manage to write the mutable vector iterator? The answer is simple: They used unsafe code. There is no other way. The Rust compiler simply does not know that whenever you ask a mutable vector iterator for the next element, that you get a different reference every time and never the same reference twice. Of course, we know that such an iterator won't give you the same reference twice and that makes it safe to offer this kind of interface you are used to. We don't need to "freeze" such an iterator. If the references an iterator returns don't overlap, it's safe to not have to borrow the iterator for accessing an element. Internally, this is done using unsafe code (turning raw pointers into references).
The easy solution for your problem might be to rely on MutItems. This is already a library-provided mutable iterator over a vector. So, you might get away with just using that instead of your own custom type, or you could wrap it inside your custom iterator type. In case you can't do that for some reason, you would have to write your own unsafe code. And if you do so, make sure that
You don't create multiple mutable references that alias. If you did, this would violate the Rust rules and invoke undefined behavior.
You don't forget to use the PhantomData type to tell the compiler that your iterator is a reference-like type where replacing the lifetime with a longer one is not allowed and could otherwise create a dangling iterator.

Eliminating double mutable borrow in method [duplicate]

Why is the following invalid and what should I do instead to make it work?
struct Foo;
impl Foo {
fn mutable1(&mut self) -> Result<(), &str> {
Ok(())
}
fn mutable2(&mut self) -> Result<(), &str> {
self.mutable1()?;
self.mutable1()?;
Ok(())
}
}
This code yields:
error[E0499]: cannot borrow `*self` as mutable more than once at a time
--> src/lib.rs:10:9
|
8 | fn mutable2(&mut self) -> Result<(), &str> {
| - let's call the lifetime of this reference `'1`
9 | self.mutable1()?;
| ---- - returning this value requires that `*self` is borrowed for `'1`
| |
| first mutable borrow occurs here
10 | self.mutable1()?;
| ^^^^ second mutable borrow occurs here
There are many questions already with the same error but I cannot use them to address this one as it's the presence of the implicit return provided by ? that causes the problem, without ? the code compiles successfully, yet with warnings.
Playground
This is the same problem discussed in Returning a reference from a HashMap or Vec causes a borrow to last beyond the scope it's in?. Through lifetime elision, the lifetime of the &str is tied to the lifetime of &self. The compiler isn't aware that the borrow won't be used in the condition that an Ok is returned. It's overly conservative and disallows this code. This is a limitation of the current borrow checker implementation.
If you did need the lifetime of the Err variant to be tied to the lifetime of the Foo instance, there's not much to be done in safe Rust (unsafe Rust is another story). In your case, however, it seems unlikely that your &str is intended to be tied to the lifetime of self, so you can use explicit lifetimes to avoid the problem. For example, a &'static str is a common basic error type:
impl Foo {
fn mutable1(&mut self) -> Result<(), &'static str> {
Ok(())
}
fn mutable2(&mut self) -> Result<(), &'static str> {
self.mutable1()?;
self.mutable1()?;
Ok(())
}
}
as it's the presence of the implicit return provided by ?
Not really, as the same code with explicit returns has the same problem:
fn mutable2(&mut self) -> Result<(), &str> {
if let Err(e) = self.mutable1() {
return Err(e);
}
if let Err(e) = self.mutable1() {
return Err(e);
}
Ok(())
}
error[E0499]: cannot borrow `*self` as mutable more than once at a time
--> src/lib.rs:12:25
|
8 | fn mutable2(&mut self) -> Result<(), &str> {
| - let's call the lifetime of this reference `'1`
9 | if let Err(e) = self.mutable1() {
| ---- first mutable borrow occurs here
10 | return Err(e);
| ------ returning this value requires that `*self` is borrowed for `'1`
11 | }
12 | if let Err(e) = self.mutable1() {
| ^^^^ second mutable borrow occurs here
Current limitation of the Rust borrow checker, we have to rewrite the corresponding methods to static method, for example
fn mutable2(&mut self) -> Result<(), &str> {
...
if let Err(e) = Self::mutable1(&a, &b, &c) {
return Err(e);
}
if let Err(e) = Self::mutable1(&e, &f, &g) {
return Err(e);
}
Ok(())
}

Cannot borrow `*self` as mutable more than once at a time when returning a Result containing a reference

Why is the following invalid and what should I do instead to make it work?
struct Foo;
impl Foo {
fn mutable1(&mut self) -> Result<(), &str> {
Ok(())
}
fn mutable2(&mut self) -> Result<(), &str> {
self.mutable1()?;
self.mutable1()?;
Ok(())
}
}
This code yields:
error[E0499]: cannot borrow `*self` as mutable more than once at a time
--> src/lib.rs:10:9
|
8 | fn mutable2(&mut self) -> Result<(), &str> {
| - let's call the lifetime of this reference `'1`
9 | self.mutable1()?;
| ---- - returning this value requires that `*self` is borrowed for `'1`
| |
| first mutable borrow occurs here
10 | self.mutable1()?;
| ^^^^ second mutable borrow occurs here
There are many questions already with the same error but I cannot use them to address this one as it's the presence of the implicit return provided by ? that causes the problem, without ? the code compiles successfully, yet with warnings.
Playground
This is the same problem discussed in Returning a reference from a HashMap or Vec causes a borrow to last beyond the scope it's in?. Through lifetime elision, the lifetime of the &str is tied to the lifetime of &self. The compiler isn't aware that the borrow won't be used in the condition that an Ok is returned. It's overly conservative and disallows this code. This is a limitation of the current borrow checker implementation.
If you did need the lifetime of the Err variant to be tied to the lifetime of the Foo instance, there's not much to be done in safe Rust (unsafe Rust is another story). In your case, however, it seems unlikely that your &str is intended to be tied to the lifetime of self, so you can use explicit lifetimes to avoid the problem. For example, a &'static str is a common basic error type:
impl Foo {
fn mutable1(&mut self) -> Result<(), &'static str> {
Ok(())
}
fn mutable2(&mut self) -> Result<(), &'static str> {
self.mutable1()?;
self.mutable1()?;
Ok(())
}
}
as it's the presence of the implicit return provided by ?
Not really, as the same code with explicit returns has the same problem:
fn mutable2(&mut self) -> Result<(), &str> {
if let Err(e) = self.mutable1() {
return Err(e);
}
if let Err(e) = self.mutable1() {
return Err(e);
}
Ok(())
}
error[E0499]: cannot borrow `*self` as mutable more than once at a time
--> src/lib.rs:12:25
|
8 | fn mutable2(&mut self) -> Result<(), &str> {
| - let's call the lifetime of this reference `'1`
9 | if let Err(e) = self.mutable1() {
| ---- first mutable borrow occurs here
10 | return Err(e);
| ------ returning this value requires that `*self` is borrowed for `'1`
11 | }
12 | if let Err(e) = self.mutable1() {
| ^^^^ second mutable borrow occurs here
Current limitation of the Rust borrow checker, we have to rewrite the corresponding methods to static method, for example
fn mutable2(&mut self) -> Result<(), &str> {
...
if let Err(e) = Self::mutable1(&a, &b, &c) {
return Err(e);
}
if let Err(e) = Self::mutable1(&e, &f, &g) {
return Err(e);
}
Ok(())
}

Resources