I want to apply format arguments (for example to limit the amount of digits) to the members of my struct. My current implementation looks roughly like this:
use std::fmt;
#[derive(Debug)]
pub struct Vec2 { x: f32, y: f32 }
impl fmt::Display for Vec2 {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
write!(f, "[{}, {}]", self.x, self.y)
}
}
If I use the automatically derived debug printing using e.g. {:.2?}, the arguments are applied and only 2 places after the decimal are printed. This doesn't seem to work with my Display implementation though using {:.2}. I tried to look at the Debug implementation using cargo expand but there are many functions specifically for Debug.
The easiest way will be to forward the formatting:
impl fmt::Display for Vec2 {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
f.write_str("[")?;
fmt::Display::fmt(&self.x, f)?;
f.write_str(", ")?;
fmt::Display::fmt(&self.y, f)?;
f.write_str("]")
}
}
Note that if you want to have all formatting specifiers, you have to implement additional traits. For floats, it's only std::fmt::LowerExp and std::fmt::UpperExp. You can make a little helper function to not duplicate code:
impl Vec2 {
fn fmt(
&self,
f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>,
fmt_fn: fn(&f32, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result,
) -> fmt::Result {
f.write_str("[")?;
fmt_fn(&self.x, f)?;
f.write_str(", ")?;
fmt_fn(&self.y, f)?;
f.write_str("]")
}
}
impl fmt::Display for Vec2 {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
self.fmt(f, fmt::Display::fmt)
}
}
impl fmt::LowerExp for Vec2 {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
self.fmt(f, fmt::LowerExp::fmt)
}
}
impl fmt::UpperExp for Vec2 {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
self.fmt(f, fmt::UpperExp::fmt)
}
}
Related
I'm struggling to understand the nuances of the ? operator. Take the following code:
link to playground
use std::{error::Error as StdError, fmt};
#[derive(Debug)]
struct MyError(Box<dyn StdError>);
impl fmt::Display for MyError {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
fmt::Debug::fmt(self, f)
}
}
impl StdError for MyError{}
impl From<Box<dyn StdError>> for MyError {
fn from(err: Box<dyn StdError>) -> Self {
MyError(err)
}
}
#[derive(Debug)]
struct RandomErr(String);
impl fmt::Display for RandomErr {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
fmt::Debug::fmt(self, f)
}
}
impl StdError for RandomErr{}
fn no_custom() -> Result<(), Box<dyn StdError>> {
Err(RandomErr("hello there".to_owned()))?
}
// This fails to compile
fn custom() -> Result<(), MyError> {
Err(RandomErr("hello there".to_owned()))?
}
I would think that custom() should compile. RandomError is a StdError, so RandomErr should be convertable to MyError since there's an impl for converting from StdError, no?
I would think that custom() should compile. RandomError is a StdError, so RandomErr should be convertable to MyError since there's an impl for converting from StdError, no?
Nope. There is no transitivity in From (or any trait, as far as I know). Rustc generally does what you tell it and no more to avoid problems like combinatory explosions in trait resolution.
So that C: From<B> and B: From<A> does not imply / translate to C: From<A>, you can write that reduced case and will hit E0277 (trait not satisfied):
struct A;
struct B;
struct C;
impl From<A> for B {
fn from(a: A) -> Self { B }
}
impl From<B> for C {
fn from(b: B) -> Self { C }
}
fn main() {
let _: C = From::from(A);
}
In rust, I want in my impl fmt::Display for MainStruct, to be able to print another struct.
#[derive(Clone, Default)]
pub struct MainStruct {
pub child: Option<ChildStruct>
}
#[derive(Clone, Default)]
pub struct ChildStruct {
pub field: String
}
impl std::fmt::Display for MainStruct {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut std::fmt::Formatter) -> std::fmt::Result {
write!(f, "MainStruct: child:{}", self.child)
}
}
impl std::fmt::Display for ChildStruct {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut std::fmt::Formatter) -> std::fmt::Result {
write!(f, "ChildStruct: field:{}", self.field)
}
}
I have tried with the default {} formatter, and with the {:?} formatter, but without any success.
The Problem is that Option<T> has not implemented the Display trait. So you have to get the value out of the option. The easiest to do so is .unwrap(). This however panics if the option is None. (other methods for unpacking are expect, match, …)
If you use .unwrap() the value is moved out of the Option. So the Option would now be invalid as it would not contain anything anymore. The compiler prevents this with an error cannot move out of 'self.child'.
So what you actually want is a reference that does not consume the child. So you want &T or &mut T from the Option. You can do that by using the .as_ref() to convert Option<T> to Option<&T>. Then if you do .unwrap() on that the compiler wont complain anymore as you just copy a &T pointer.
so your code compiles if you change the following:
impl std::fmt::Display for MainStruct {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut std::fmt::Formatter) -> std::fmt::Result {
write!(f, "MainStruct: child:{}", self.child.as_ref().unwrap())
}
}
Since Option does not implement Display, you have to write some logic yourself to handle two possible cases. The simplest way might be to just match on the Option explicitly:
impl std::fmt::Display for MainStruct {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut std::fmt::Formatter) -> std::fmt::Result {
write!(f, "MainStruct: child: ")?;
match self.child.as_ref() {
Some(child) => write!(f, "Some({})", child),
None => write!(f, "None"),
}
}
}
Here's the playground with a short test case.
I have some code which returns a trait object of type MyTrait so that it can return one of several different structs. I would like to implement the Display trait for the trait object so that I can print the object, with the details delegated to the various structs as they each need their own custom formatters.
I can achieve this by including a formatting method as part of the MyTrait definition, and then implementing Display for MyTrait and delegating - like this:
trait MyTrait {
fn is_even(&self) -> bool;
fn my_fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result;
}
impl fmt::Display for MyTrait {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
self.my_fmt(f)
}
}
However, I already have the Display trait implemented for each of the structs which implement MyTrait. This means I end up with two methods for each struct which do the same thing - the fmt() method to satisfy the Display trait directly on the struct, and the my_fmt() method which is called by the code above. This seems clumsy and repetitive. Is there a simpler way to do it?
Here's a complete example program which illustrates the point. It's a little longer than I would have liked (it's based on the answer to my previous question Calling functions which return different types with shared trait and pass to other functions), but I couldn't think of a simpler way to illustrate the point. Of course, in this toy example the structs and the fmt functions are very simple; in my real application they are more complex.
use std::fmt;
trait MyTrait {
fn is_even(&self) -> bool;
fn my_fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result;
}
struct First {
v: u8,
}
struct Second {
v: Vec<u8>,
}
impl MyTrait for First {
fn is_even(&self) -> bool {
self.v % 2 == 0
}
fn my_fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
write!(f, "{}", self.v)
}
}
impl MyTrait for Second {
fn is_even(&self) -> bool {
self.v[0] % 2 == 0
}
fn my_fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
write!(f, "{}", self.v[0])
}
}
fn make1() -> First {
First { v: 5 }
}
fn make2() -> Second {
Second { v: vec![2, 3, 5] }
}
// Implement Display for the structs and for MyTrait
impl fmt::Display for First {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
write!(f, "{}", self.v)
}
}
impl fmt::Display for Second {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
write!(f, "{}", self.v[0])
}
}
impl fmt::Display for MyTrait {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
self.my_fmt(f)
}
}
fn requires_mytrait<T: MyTrait + ?Sized>(v: &&T) {
println!("{:?}", v.is_even());
}
fn main() {
for i in 0..2 {
let v1;
let v2;
let v = match i {
0 => {
v1 = make1();
println!("> {}", v1); // Demonstrate that Display
// is implemented directly
// on the type.
&v1 as &MyTrait
}
_ => {
v2 = make2();
println!("> {}", v2); // Demonstrate that Display
// is implemented directly
// on the type.
&v2 as &MyTrait
}
};
requires_mytrait(&v);
println!("{}", v); // Here I print the trait object
}
}
Can anyone suggest a simpler, cleaner way to do this?
You can make Display a supertrait of MyTrait.
trait MyTrait: fmt::Display {
fn is_even(&self) -> bool;
}
This will make trait objects of MyTrait be Display. This only works if you expect all implementors of MyTrait to implement Display, but that was also the case in your previous solution.
I have a simple structure for holding intervals of f64s:
pub struct Interval {
pub min: f64,
pub max: f64
}
This code prints with hardcoded 3 decimal places:
impl fmt::Debug for Interval {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
write!(f, "[{:.3?} {:.3?}]", self.min, self.max)
}
}
I want to support println!("{:.6}", my_interval) to be able to print with desired precision.
As mentioned in the comments, use Formatter::precision. There is already an example of this in the documentation:
impl fmt::Binary for Vector2D {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
let magnitude = (self.x * self.x + self.y * self.y) as f64;
let magnitude = magnitude.sqrt();
// Respect the formatting flags by using the helper method
// `pad_integral` on the Formatter object. See the method
// documentation for details, and the function `pad` can be used
// to pad strings.
let decimals = f.precision().unwrap_or(3);
let string = format!("{:.*}", decimals, magnitude);
f.pad_integral(true, "", &string)
}
}
For your case:
impl fmt::Debug for Interval {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
let precision = f.precision().unwrap_or(3);
write!(f, "[{:.*?} {:.*?}]", precision, self.min, precision, self.max)
}
}
It is considered good practice to #[derive(Debug)] for most structs you create to aid in debugging. However, this is not possible if your struct contains a type without Debug, such as traits. But if the trait is under my control, is there something I can do to let users' implementations of said trait show up in the debug message?
I could require that people who implement my trait also implement Debug, but I don't like having to add that arbitrary requirement:
trait MyTrait: Debug { ... }
I could just implement Debug for my trait:
trait MyTrait { ... }
impl Debug for MyTrait {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
write!(f, "MyTrait {{ ... }}")
}
}
This doesn't allow implementations to override Debug - it's almost as if the function is not virtual. How can I make this work?
use std::fmt;
use std::fmt::{ Formatter, Debug };
#[derive(Debug)]
struct A {
a: Box<Data>,
}
trait Data {}
impl Debug for Data {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
write!(f, "Data{{ ... }}")
}
}
#[derive(Debug)]
struct B(i32);
impl Data for B {}
fn main() {
let a = A{ a: Box::new(B(42)) };
println!("{:?}", a);
}
Outputs:
A { a: Data{ ... } }
What I want:
A { a: B(42) }
I only want the first output when B does not implement Debug.
You can create your own trait method. Types that wish to have enhanced debugging and implement Debug can delegate:
use std::fmt;
use std::fmt::{ Formatter, Debug };
#[derive(Debug)]
struct Container(Box<Data>);
trait Data {
fn debug_fmt(&self, f: &mut Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
write!(f, "Data {{ ... }}")
}
}
impl Debug for Data {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
self.debug_fmt(f)
}
}
#[derive(Debug)]
struct Overrides(i32);
impl Data for Overrides {
fn debug_fmt(&self, f: &mut Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
self.fmt(f)
}
}
#[derive(Debug)]
struct Defaults(i32);
impl Data for Defaults {}
fn main() {
let a = Container(Box::new(Overrides(42)));
println!("{:?}", a);
let a = Container(Box::new(Defaults(42)));
println!("{:?}", a);
}
An alternate solution that requires the unstable specialization feature:
#![feature(specialization)]
use std::fmt;
use std::fmt::{Formatter, Debug};
struct Container<D>(Box<D>) where D: Data;
impl<D> Debug for Container<D>
where D: Data
{
default fn fmt(&self, f: &mut Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
write!(f, "Container(Data {{ ... }})")
}
}
impl<D> Debug for Container<D>
where D: Data + Debug
{
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut Formatter) -> fmt::Result {
write!(f, "Container({:?})", self.0)
}
}
trait Data {}
#[derive(Debug)]
struct Overrides(i32);
impl Data for Overrides {}
struct Defaults(i32);
impl Data for Defaults {}
fn main() {
let a = Container(Box::new(Overrides(42)));
println!("{:?}", a);
let a = Container(Box::new(Defaults(42)));
println!("{:?}", a);
}
Note that this places the burden on the container.