Use trait as interface for database entity - rust

I am trying to make an Entity interface for dynamically mapping a database result into a Rust struct:
pub trait Entity {
fn map(&self, Result<QueryResult>) -> Self;
}
pub struct DbQuery<T> {
pub sql: String,
pub params: Vec<Value>,
pub limit: i32,
pub paged: Option<Pagination>,
pub entity: T,
}
pub struct Settings {
pub name: String,
pub value: Option<String>,
}
impl Entity for Settings {
fn map(&self, result: Result<QueryResult>) -> Settings {
// ...
Settings {
name: "hello".to_string(),
value: None,
}
}
}
impl DbMapper {
// ...
pub fn find<T>(&self, query: DbQuery<T>) -> Option<Vec<T>> {
println!("query find SQL: {}", query.sql);
let mut stmt = &self.pool.prepare(query.sql).unwrap();
let ret = Vec::new();
for row in stmt.execute(query.params).unwrap() {
ret.push(query.entity.map(row.unwrap()));
}
Some(ret)
}
}
But I get an error:
error: no method named map found for type T in the current scope
ret.push(query.entity.map(row.unwrap())); |
note: the method map exists but the following trait
bounds were not satisfied: T : std::iter::Iterator = help: items
from traits can only be used if the trait is implemented and in scope;
the following traits define an item map, perhaps you need to
implement one of them: = help: candidate #1:
models::holders::database::Entity = help: candidate #2:
std::iter::Iterator

Here is a version of your code that runs on the playground and replicates your issue:
pub struct QueryResult;
pub struct Value;
pub struct Pagination;
pub struct DbMapper;
pub trait Entity {
fn map(&self, Result<QueryResult, ()>) -> Self;
}
pub struct DbQuery<T> {
pub sql: String,
pub params: Vec<Value>,
pub limit: i32,
pub paged: Option<Pagination>,
pub entity: T,
}
pub struct Settings {
pub name: String,
pub value: Option<String>,
}
impl Entity for Settings {
fn map(&self, result: Result<QueryResult, ()>) -> Settings {
// ...
Settings {
name: "hello".to_string(),
value: None,
}
}
}
impl DbMapper {
// ...
pub fn find<T>(&self, query: DbQuery<T>) -> Option<Vec<T>> {
println!("query find SQL: {}", query.sql);
// ########## attempt to call map()
let _ = query.entity.map(Ok(QueryResult {}));
let ret = Vec::new();
Some(ret)
}
}
fn main() {}
The problem is that T in the DbQuery<T> argument in the find method has no idea that T is an Entity type. So we need to tell it:
pub fn find<T>(&self, query: DbQuery<T>) -> Option<Vec<T>>
where T: Entity
{
// ... code here ...
}
This now compiles and runs.
The compiler now knows that T is an Entity of some description, and it can call the map method on it.

Related

What pattern to utilize to use a Vec of differing nested generic types/trait objects?

I'm trying to implement a pattern where different Processors can dictate the input type they take and produce a unified output (currently a fixed type, but I'd like to get it generic once this current implementation is working).
Below is a minimal example:
use std::convert::From;
use processor::NoOpProcessor;
use self::{
input::{Input, InputStore},
output::UnifiedOutput,
processor::{MultiplierProcessor, Processor, StringProcessor},
};
mod input {
use std::collections::HashMap;
#[derive(Debug)]
pub struct Input<T>(pub T);
#[derive(Default)]
pub struct InputStore(HashMap<String, String>);
impl InputStore {
pub fn insert<K, V>(mut self, key: K, value: V) -> Self
where
K: ToString,
V: ToString,
{
let key = key.to_string();
let value = value.to_string();
self.0.insert(key, value);
self
}
pub fn get<K, V>(&self, key: K) -> Option<Input<V>>
where
K: ToString,
for<'a> &'a String: Into<V>,
{
let key = key.to_string();
self.0.get(&key).map(|value| Input(value.into()))
}
}
}
mod processor {
use super::{input::Input, output::UnifiedOutput};
use super::I32Input;
pub struct NoOpProcessor;
pub trait Processor {
type I;
fn process(&self, input: &Input<Self::I>) -> UnifiedOutput;
}
impl Processor for NoOpProcessor {
type I = I32Input;
fn process(&self, input: &Input<Self::I>) -> UnifiedOutput {
UnifiedOutput(input.0 .0)
}
}
pub struct MultiplierProcessor(pub i32);
impl Processor for MultiplierProcessor {
type I = I32Input;
fn process(&self, input: &Input<Self::I>) -> UnifiedOutput {
UnifiedOutput(input.0 .0 * self.0)
}
}
pub struct StringProcessor;
impl Processor for StringProcessor {
type I = String;
fn process(&self, input: &Input<Self::I>) -> UnifiedOutput {
UnifiedOutput(input.0.parse().unwrap())
}
}
}
mod output {
#[derive(Debug)]
pub struct UnifiedOutput(pub i32);
}
pub fn main() {
let input_store = InputStore::default()
.insert("input_a", 123)
.insert("input_b", 567)
.insert("input_c", "789");
let processors = {
let mut labelled_processors = Vec::new();
// let mut labelled_processors: Vec<LabelledProcessor<Input<>>> = Vec::new(); // What's the correct type?
labelled_processors.push(LabelledProcessor("input_a", Box::new(NoOpProcessor)));
labelled_processors.push(LabelledProcessor(
"input_b",
Box::new(MultiplierProcessor(3)),
));
// labelled_processors.push(LabelledProcessor("input_c", Box::new(StringProcessor)));
labelled_processors
};
for processor in processors {
let output = retrieve_input_and_process(&input_store, processor);
println!("{:?}", output);
}
}
#[derive(Debug)]
pub struct I32Input(pub i32);
impl From<&String> for I32Input {
fn from(s: &String) -> Self {
Self(s.parse().unwrap())
}
}
struct LabelledProcessor<I>(&'static str, Box<dyn Processor<I = I>>)
where
for<'a> &'a String: Into<I>;
fn retrieve_input_and_process<T>(
store: &InputStore,
processor: LabelledProcessor<T>,
) -> UnifiedOutput
where
for<'a> &'a String: Into<T>,
{
let input = store.get(processor.0).unwrap();
processor.1.process(&input)
}
When // labelled_processors.push(LabelledProcessor("input_c", Box::new(StringProcessor))); is uncommented, I get the below compilation error:
error[E0271]: type mismatch resolving `<attempt2::processor::StringProcessor as attempt2::processor::Processor>::I == attempt2::I32Input`
--> src/attempt2.rs:101:63
|
101 | labelled_processors.push(LabelledProcessor("input_c", Box::new(StringProcessor)));
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ type mismatch resolving `<attempt2::processor::StringProcessor as attempt2::processor::Processor>::I == attempt2::I32Input`
|
note: expected this to be `attempt2::I32Input`
--> src/attempt2.rs:75:18
|
75 | type I = String;
| ^^^^^^
= note: required for the cast from `attempt2::processor::StringProcessor` to the object type `dyn attempt2::processor::Processor<I = attempt2::I32Input>`
I think I've learnt enough to "get" what the issue is - the labelled_processors vec expects all its items to have the same type. My problem is I'm unsure how to rectify this. I've tried to leverage dynamic dispatch more (for example changing LabelledProcessor to struct LabelledProcessor(&'static str, Box<dyn Processor<dyn Input>>);). However these changes spiral to their own issues with the type system too.
Other answers I've found online generally don't address this level of complexity with respect to the nested generics/traits - stopping at 1 level with the answer being let vec_x: Vec<Box<dyn SomeTrait>> .... This makes me wonder if there's an obvious answer that can be reached that I've just missed or if there's a whole different pattern I should be employing instead to achieve this goal?
I'm aware of potentially utilizing enums as wel, but that would mean all usecases would need to be captured within this module and it may not be able to define inputs/outputs/processors in external modules.
A bit lost at this point.
--- EDIT ---
Some extra points:
This is just an example, so things like InputStore basically converting everything to String is just an implementation detail. It's mainly to symbolize the concept of "the type needs to comply with some trait to be accepted", I just chose String for simplicity.
One possible solution would be to make retrieve_input_and_process a method of LabelledProcessor, and then hide the type behind a trait:
use std::convert::From;
use processor::NoOpProcessor;
use self::{
input::InputStore,
output::UnifiedOutput,
processor::{MultiplierProcessor, Processor, StringProcessor},
};
mod input {
use std::collections::HashMap;
#[derive(Debug)]
pub struct Input<T>(pub T);
#[derive(Default)]
pub struct InputStore(HashMap<String, String>);
impl InputStore {
pub fn insert<K, V>(mut self, key: K, value: V) -> Self
where
K: ToString,
V: ToString,
{
let key = key.to_string();
let value = value.to_string();
self.0.insert(key, value);
self
}
pub fn get<K, V>(&self, key: K) -> Option<Input<V>>
where
K: ToString,
for<'a> &'a str: Into<V>,
{
let key = key.to_string();
self.0.get(&key).map(|value| Input(value.as_str().into()))
}
}
}
mod processor {
use super::{input::Input, output::UnifiedOutput};
use super::I32Input;
pub struct NoOpProcessor;
pub trait Processor {
type I;
fn process(&self, input: &Input<Self::I>) -> UnifiedOutput;
}
impl Processor for NoOpProcessor {
type I = I32Input;
fn process(&self, input: &Input<Self::I>) -> UnifiedOutput {
UnifiedOutput(input.0 .0)
}
}
pub struct MultiplierProcessor(pub i32);
impl Processor for MultiplierProcessor {
type I = I32Input;
fn process(&self, input: &Input<Self::I>) -> UnifiedOutput {
UnifiedOutput(input.0 .0 * self.0)
}
}
pub struct StringProcessor;
impl Processor for StringProcessor {
type I = String;
fn process(&self, input: &Input<Self::I>) -> UnifiedOutput {
UnifiedOutput(input.0.parse().unwrap())
}
}
}
mod output {
#[derive(Debug)]
pub struct UnifiedOutput(pub i32);
}
pub fn main() {
let input_store = InputStore::default()
.insert("input_a", 123)
.insert("input_b", 567)
.insert("input_c", "789");
let processors = {
let mut labelled_processors: Vec<Box<dyn LabelledProcessorRef>> = Vec::new();
labelled_processors.push(Box::new(LabelledProcessor(
"input_a",
Box::new(NoOpProcessor),
)));
labelled_processors.push(Box::new(LabelledProcessor(
"input_b",
Box::new(MultiplierProcessor(3)),
)));
labelled_processors.push(Box::new(LabelledProcessor(
"input_c",
Box::new(StringProcessor),
)));
labelled_processors
};
for processor in processors {
let output = processor.retrieve_input_and_process(&input_store);
println!("{:?}", output);
}
}
#[derive(Debug)]
pub struct I32Input(pub i32);
impl From<&str> for I32Input {
fn from(s: &str) -> Self {
Self(s.parse().unwrap())
}
}
struct LabelledProcessor<I>(&'static str, Box<dyn Processor<I = I>>);
impl<I> LabelledProcessorRef for LabelledProcessor<I>
where
for<'a> &'a str: Into<I>,
{
fn retrieve_input_and_process(&self, store: &InputStore) -> UnifiedOutput {
let input = store.get(self.0).unwrap();
self.1.process(&input)
}
}
trait LabelledProcessorRef {
fn retrieve_input_and_process(&self, store: &InputStore) -> UnifiedOutput;
}
UnifiedOutput(123)
UnifiedOutput(1701)
UnifiedOutput(789)

How to use the typestate pattern in other struct

I want to use the typestate pattern to define several states that allow some exclusive operations on each of them.
I'm using traits instead of an enum to allow further customizations.
So, I'm able to use this pattern until I try to include it inside a struct (the Session part) that is mutated when files are added, changed or removed.
trait IssueState {}
struct Open;
impl IssueState for Open {}
struct WIP {
elapsed_time: u32,
}
impl IssueState for WIP {}
struct Closed {
elapsed_time: u32,
}
impl IssueState for Closed {}
struct Issue<T: IssueState + ?Sized> {
state: Box<T>,
comments: Vec<String>,
}
impl<T: IssueState> Issue<T> {
pub fn comment<S: Into<String>>(&mut self, comment: S) -> &mut Self {
self.comments.push(comment.into());
self
}
}
impl Issue<Open> {
pub fn new() -> Self {
Self {
state: Box::new(Open),
comments: vec![],
}
}
pub fn start(self) -> Issue<WIP> {
Issue {
state: Box::new(WIP { elapsed_time: 0 }),
comments: self.comments,
}
}
}
impl Issue<WIP> {
pub fn work(&mut self, time: u32) -> &mut Self {
self.state.elapsed_time += time;
self
}
pub fn done(self) -> Issue<Closed> {
let elapsed_time = self.state.elapsed_time;
Issue {
state: Box::new(Closed { elapsed_time }),
comments: self.comments,
}
}
}
impl Issue<Closed> {
pub fn elapsed(&self) -> u32 {
self.state.elapsed_time
}
}
struct Session<T: IssueState> {
user: String,
current_issue: Issue<T>,
}
impl<T: IssueState> Session<T> {
pub fn new<S: Into<String>>(user: S, issue: Issue<T>) -> Self {
Self {
user: user.into(),
current_issue: issue,
}
}
pub fn comment<S: Into<String>>(&mut self, comment: S) {
self.current_issue.comment(comment);
}
}
impl Session<WIP> {
pub fn work(&mut self, time: u32) {
self.current_issue.work(time);
}
}
trait Watcher {
fn watch_file_create(&mut self);
fn watch_file_change(&mut self);
fn watch_file_delete(&mut self);
}
impl<T: IssueState> Watcher for Session<T> {
fn watch_file_create(&mut self) {
self.current_issue = Issue::<Open>::new();
}
fn watch_file_change(&mut self) {}
fn watch_file_delete(&mut self) {}
}
fn main() {
let open = Issue::<Open>::new();
let mut wip = open.start();
wip.work(10).work(30).work(60);
let closed = wip.done();
println!("Elapsed {}", closed.elapsed());
let mut session = Session::new("Reviewer", closed);
session.comment("It is OK");
session.watch_file_create();
}
Rust Playground (original)
Rust Playground (edited)
What can I do to fix the problems?
Is the typestate pattern limited to only some situations that do not depend a lot on external events? I mean, I'm trying to use it for processing events, but is it a dead end?, why?
Your Session has a Issue<dyn IssueState> member, but you want to implement its work method by calling Issue<WIP>'s work method. The compiler complains, because an Issue<dyn IssueState> is not (necessarily) a Issue<WIP> and so does not implement that method.

how to define multi parameter with from function in rust

Now I want to map object from Favorites to FavMusicResponse, the Favorites object was selected from database and the FavMusicResponse entity was return to the client. I define the map function like this way in FavMusicResponse:
impl From<&Favorites> for FavMusicResponse {
fn from(f: &Favorites, music: Music) -> Self {
Self{
id: f.id,
song_id: None,
created_time: f.created_time,
updated_time: f.updated_time,
user_id: 0,
source_id: "".to_string(),
like_status: 0,
source: 0,
playlist_id: 0,
play_count: 0,
fetched_download_url: None,
downloaded: None,
music: Default::default()
}
}
}
most of the fields from Favorites fields are the same with FavMusicResponse, the only difference is that music was passed from another entity. This is my FavMusicResponse define:
#[derive( Serialize, Queryable, Deserialize,Default, Clone)]
pub struct FavMusicResponse{
pub id: i64,
pub song_id: Option<i64>,
pub created_time: i64,
pub updated_time: i64,
pub user_id: i64,
pub source_id: String,
pub like_status: i32,
pub source: i32,
pub playlist_id: i64,
pub play_count: i32,
pub fetched_download_url: Option<i32>,
pub downloaded: Option<i32>,
pub music: Music
}
the compiler tell me that from expected 1 parameter, found 2, what should I do do pass 2 or more parameter into the composite function in rust? I invoke the function like this way:
let filtered_music:Vec<_> = musics.iter()
.filter(|item| item.source_id == fav.source_id)
.map(|item|FavMusicResponse::from(fav,item.clone()))
.collect();
I want to passed two entity and composite to the finally FavMusicResponse entity. what should I do to make it work like that? This is my minimal reproduce that could run in rust playground to figure out where is going wrong:
fn main() {
let music = Music{
id: 1
};
let favMusic = Favorites{
id: 1
};
let musicRes = FavMusicResponse::from(favMusic,music);
}
pub struct Music {
pub id: i64
}
pub struct Favorites {
pub id: i64
}
pub struct FavMusicResponse {
pub id: i64,
pub music:Music
}
impl From<Favorites> for FavMusicResponse {
fn from(f: Favorites, music: Music) -> Self {
Self{
id: f.id,
music: music
}
}
}
From trait can't take two parameters only one, it's define that way, the only solution if you really want to use From trait is to transform your two parameter into one, a quick solution is to use a tuple:
impl From<(Favorites, Music)> for FavMusicResponse {
fn from((f, music): (Favorites, Music)) -> Self {
Self {
id: f.id,
music,
}
}
}
// let musicRes = FavMusicResponse::from((favMusic, music));
That said you could also just have a new() method on your type:
impl FavMusicResponse {
fn new(f: Favorites, music: Music) -> Self {
Self {
id: f.id,
music,
}
}
}
// let musicRes = FavMusicResponse::new(favMusic, music);

How to properly solve lifetime inferences in struct?

The Rust playground code is here.
I have a struct of Token which has lifetime 'tok, and a scanner has lifetime 'lexer. I'm using both of them in another struct Parser, then I had a problem:
pub struct Token<'tok> {
pub value: Cow<'tok, str>,
pub line: usize,
}
pub struct Scanner {
pub source: Vec<char>,
pub current: usize,
pub line: usize,
}
pub struct Parser<'lexer> {
pub curr: &'lexer Token<'lexer>,
pub prev: &'lexer Token<'lexer>,
scanner: &'lexer mut Scanner,
}
impl <'lexer> Parser<'lexer> {
pub fn advance(&mut self) {
self.prev = self.curr;
self.curr = &self.scanner.next(); // cannot inference lifetime
}
}
I think the problem is Token has lifetime 'tok, and the borrow checker doesn't know the relation between 'tok and 'lexer so it can't inference proper lifetime.
However, I can avoid the problem by modifying it into the updated code:
pub struct Parser<'lexer> {
pub curr: Token<'lexer>,
pub prev: Token<'lexer>,
scanner: &'lexer mut Scanner,
}
impl <'lexer> Parser<'lexer> {
pub fn advance(&mut self) {
let prev = std::mem::replace(&mut self.curr, self.scanner.next());
self.prev = prev;
}
}
And with Token produced by next() is static:
impl Scanner {
pub fn next(&mut self) -> Token<'static> {
Token {
value: Cow::from(""),
line: 0,
}
}
}
It does compile but I think it's not ideal because all tokens are cloned from scanner into parser(they are not references anymore) and living until end of Parser's life. So memory usage is doubled. Is there a more proper way to deal with this?
Actualy your code structure is not ideal to deal with the borrow checker here why:
Token struct should be owned, the struct itself do not require any allocations (as the token is owned some indrection are required to allow prev <-> next switching)
None of the Parser or Lexer should own the base data so it will be easy to bound proper lifetime
In our case Vec<Char> is not a friendly type to work with (we do not need to own the data and this will be harder to make the comipler understand lifetimes), instead we're going to use an &'str but you could reproduce the exact behaviours with an &[char])
Here is an example that compile just fine
pub struct Token<'source> {
pub value: Cow<'source, str>,
pub line: usize,
}
pub struct Scanner<'source> {
pub source: &'source str,
pub current: usize,
pub line: usize,
}
pub struct Parser<'source> {
pub curr: Option<Token<'source>>,
pub prev: Option<Token<'source>>,
scanner: Scanner<'source>,
}
impl <'source>Scanner<'source> {
pub fn next(&'source /* DONT Forget to bound 'source to `self` */ self) -> Token<'source> {
Token {
value: Cow::from(self.source), /* `self.source` is bound to `'source` so the compiler understand that the token lifetime is the same than the source's one */
line: 0,
}
}
}
impl <'lexer> Parser<'lexer> {
pub fn advance(&'lexer mut self) {
self.prev = self.curr.take();
self.curr = Some(self.scanner.next());
}
}

Is it possible to create a macro to implement builder pattern methods?

I have a builder pattern implemented for my struct:
pub struct Struct {
pub grand_finals_modifier: bool,
}
impl Struct {
pub fn new() -> Struct {
Struct {
grand_finals_modifier: false,
}
}
pub fn grand_finals_modifier<'a>(&'a mut self, name: bool) -> &'a mut Struct {
self.grand_finals_modifier = grand_finals_modifier;
self
}
}
Is it possible in Rust to make a macro for methods like this to generalize and avoid a lot of duplicating code? Something that we can use as the following:
impl Struct {
builder_field!(hello, bool);
}
After reading the documentation, I've come up with this code:
macro_rules! builder_field {
($field:ident, $field_type:ty) => {
pub fn $field<'a>(&'a mut self,
$field: $field_type) -> &'a mut Self {
self.$field = $field;
self
}
};
}
struct Struct {
pub hello: bool,
}
impl Struct {
builder_field!(hello, bool);
}
fn main() {
let mut s = Struct {
hello: false,
};
s.hello(true);
println!("Struct hello is: {}", s.hello);
}
It does exactly what I need: creates a public builder method with specified name, specified member and type.
To complement the already accepted answer, since it is 4 years old by now, you should check out the crate rust-derive-builder. It uses procedural macros to automatically implement the builder pattern for any struct.

Resources