Trait Objects for Using Values of Different Types

In Chapter 8, we talked about a limitation of vectors is that vectors can only store elements of one type. We had an example in Listing 8-1 where we defined a SpreadsheetCell enum that had variants to hold integers, floats, and text so that we could store different types of data in each cell and still have a vector represent a row of cells. This works for cases in which the kinds of things we want to be able to treat interchangeably are a fixed set of types that we know when our code gets compiled.

Sometimes we want the set of types that we use to be extensible by the programmers who use our library. For example, many Graphical User Interface tools have a concept of a list of items that get drawn on the screen by iterating through the list and calling a draw method on each of the items. We're going to create a library crate containing the structure of a GUI library called rust_gui. Our GUI library could include some types for people to use, such as Button or TextField. Programmers that use rust_gui will want to create more types that can be drawn on the screen: one programmer might add an Image, while another might add a SelectBox. We're not going to implement a fully-fledged GUI library in this chapter, but we will show how the pieces would fit together.

When we're writing the rust_gui library, we don't know all the types that other programmers will want to create, so we can't define an enum containing all the types. What we do know is that rust_gui needs to be able to keep track of a bunch of values of all these different types, and it needs to be able to call a draw method on each of these values. Our GUI library doesn't need to know what will happen exactly when we call the draw method, just that the value will have that method available for us to call.

In a language with inheritance, we might define a class named Component that has a method named draw on it. The other classes like Button, Image, and SelectBox would inherit from Component and thus inherit the draw method. They could each override the draw method to define their custom behavior, but the framework could treat all of the types as if they were Component instances and call draw on them.

Defining a Trait for the Common Behavior

In Rust, though, we can define a trait that we'll name Draw and that will have one method named draw. Then we can define a vector that takes a trait object, which is a trait behind some sort of pointer, such as a & reference or a Box<T> smart pointer.

We mentioned that we don't call structs and enums "objects" to distinguish structs and enums from other languages' objects. The data in the struct or enum fields and the behavior in impl blocks is separated, as opposed to other languages that have data and behavior combined into one concept called an object. Trait objects are more like objects in other languages, in the sense that they combine the data made up of the pointer to a concrete object with the behavior of the methods defined in the trait. However, trait objects are different from objects in other languages because we can't add data to a trait object. Trait objects aren't as generally useful as objects in other languages: their purpose is to allow abstraction across common behavior.

A trait defines behavior that we need in a given situation. We can then use a trait as a trait object in places where we would use a concrete type or a generic type. Rust's type system will ensure that any value we substitute in for the trait object will implement the methods of the trait. Then we don't need to know all the possible types at compile time, and we can treat all the instances the same way. Listing 17-3 shows how to define a trait named Draw with one method named draw:

Filename: src/lib.rs

pub trait Draw {
    fn draw(&self);
}

Listing 17-3: Definition of the Draw trait

This should look familiar since we talked about how to define traits in Chapter 10. Next comes something new: Listing 17-4 has the definition of a struct named Screen that holds a vector named components that are of type Box<Draw>. That Box<Draw> is a trait object: it's a stand-in for any type inside a Box that implements the Draw trait.

Filename: src/lib.rs

# pub trait Draw {
#     fn draw(&self);
# }
#
pub struct Screen {
    pub components: Vec<Box<Draw>>,
}

Listing 17-4: Definition of the Screen struct with a components field that holds a vector of trait objects that implement the Draw trait

On the Screen struct, we'll define a method named run, which will call the draw method on each of its components as shown in Listing 17-5:

Filename: src/lib.rs

# pub trait Draw {
#     fn draw(&self);
# }
#
# pub struct Screen {
#     pub components: Vec<Box<Draw>>,
# }
#
impl Screen {
    pub fn run(&self) {
        for component in self.components.iter() {
            component.draw();
        }
    }
}

Listing 17-5: Implementing a run method on Screen that calls the draw method on each component

This is different than defining a struct that uses a generic type parameter with trait bounds. A generic type parameter can only be substituted with one concrete type at a time, while trait objects allow for multiple concrete types to fill in for the trait object at runtime. For example, we could have defined the Screen struct using a generic type and a trait bound as in Listing 17-6:

Filename: src/lib.rs

# pub trait Draw {
#     fn draw(&self);
# }
#
pub struct Screen<T: Draw> {
    pub components: Vec<T>,
}

impl<T> Screen<T>
    where T: Draw {
    pub fn run(&self) {
        for component in self.components.iter() {
            component.draw();
        }
    }
}

Listing 17-6: An alternate implementation of the Screen struct and its run method using generics and trait bounds

This only lets us have a Screen instance that has a list of components that are all of type Button or all of type TextField. If you'll only ever have homogeneous collections, using generics and trait bounds is preferable since the definitions will be monomorphized at compile time to use the concrete types.

With the definition of Screen that holds a component list of trait objects in Vec<Box<Draw>> instead, one Screen instance can hold a Vec that contains a Box<Button> as well as a Box<TextField>. Let's see how that works, and then talk about the runtime performance implications.

Implementations of the Trait from Us or Library Users

Now to add some types that implement the Draw trait. We're going to provide the Button type, and again, actually implementing a GUI library is out of scope of this book, so the draw method won't have any useful implementation in its body. To imagine what the implementation might look like, a Button struct might have fields for width, height, and label, as shown in Listing 17-7:

Filename: src/lib.rs

# pub trait Draw {
#     fn draw(&self);
# }
#
pub struct Button {
    pub width: u32,
    pub height: u32,
    pub label: String,
}

impl Draw for Button {
    fn draw(&self) {
        // Code to actually draw a button
    }
}

Listing 17-7: A Button struct that implements the Draw trait

The width, height, and label fields on Button will differ from other components, such as a TextField type that might have width, height, label, and placeholder fields instead. Each of the types that we want to be able to draw on the screen will implement the Draw trait with different code in the draw method that defines how to draw that type like Button has here (without any actual GUI code that's out of scope of this chapter). In addition to implementing the Draw trait, Button might also have another impl block containing methods having to do with what happens if the button is clicked. These kinds of methods won't apply to types like TextField.

Someone using our library has decided to implement a SelectBox struct that has width, height, and options fields. They implement the Draw trait on the SelectBox type as well, as shown in Listing 17-8:

Filename: src/main.rs

extern crate rust_gui;
use rust_gui::Draw;

struct SelectBox {
    width: u32,
    height: u32,
    options: Vec<String>,
}

impl Draw for SelectBox {
    fn draw(&self) {
        // Code to actually draw a select box
    }
}

Listing 17-8: Another crate using rust_gui and implementing the Draw trait on a SelectBox struct

The user of our library can now write their main function to create a Screen instance and add a SelectBox and a Button to the screen by putting each in a Box<T> to become a trait object. They can then call the run method on the Screen instance, which will call draw on each of the components. Listing 17-9 shows this implementation:

Filename: src/main.rs

use rust_gui::{Screen, Button};

fn main() {
    let screen = Screen {
        components: vec![
            Box::new(SelectBox {
                width: 75,
                height: 10,
                options: vec![
                    String::from("Yes"),
                    String::from("Maybe"),
                    String::from("No")
                ],
            }),
            Box::new(Button {
                width: 50,
                height: 10,
                label: String::from("OK"),
            }),
        ],
    };

    screen.run();
}

Listing 17-9: Using trait objects to store values of different types that implement the same trait

Even though we didn't know that someone would add the SelectBox type someday, our Screen implementation was able to operate on the SelectBox and draw it because SelectBox implements the Draw type, which means it implements the draw method.

Only being concerned with the messages a value responds to, rather than the value's concrete type, is similar to a concept called duck typing in dynamically typed languages: if it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it must be a duck! In the implementation of run on Screen in Listing 17-5, run doesn't need to know what the concrete type of each component is. It doesn't check to see if a component is an instance of a Button or a SelectBox, it just calls the draw method on the component. By specifying Box<Draw> as the type of the values in the components vector, we've defined that Screen needs values that we can call the draw method on.

The advantage with using trait objects and Rust's type system to do duck typing is that we never have to check that a value implements a particular method at runtime or worry about getting errors if a value doesn't implement a method but we call it. Rust won't compile our code if the values don't implement the traits that the trait objects need.

For example, Listing 17-10 shows what happens if we try to create a Screen with a String as a component:

Filename: src/main.rs

extern crate rust_gui;
use rust_gui::Draw;

fn main() {
    let screen = Screen {
        components: vec![
            Box::new(String::from("Hi")),
        ],
    };

    screen.run();
}

Listing 17-10: Attempting to use a type that doesn't implement the trait object's trait

We'll get this error because String doesn't implement the Draw trait:

error[E0277]: the trait bound `std::string::String: Draw` is not satisfied
  -->
   |
 4 |             Box::new(String::from("Hi")),
   |             ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the trait `Draw` is not
   implemented for `std::string::String`
   |
   = note: required for the cast to the object type `Draw`

This lets us know that either we're passing something we didn't mean to pass to Screen and we should pass a different type, or we should implement Draw on String so that Screen is able to call draw on it.

Trait Objects Perform Dynamic Dispatch

Recall in Chapter 10 when we discussed the process of monomorphization that the compiler performs when we use trait bounds on generics: the compiler generates non-generic implementations of functions and methods for each concrete type that we use in place of a generic type parameter. The code that results from monomorphization is doing static dispatch: when the method is called, the code that goes with that method call has been determined at compile time, and looking up that code is very fast.

When we use trait objects, the compiler can't perform monomorphization because we don't know all the types that might be used with the code. Instead, Rust keeps track of the code that might be used when a method is called and figures out at runtime which code needs to be used for a particular method call. This is known as dynamic dispatch, and there's a runtime cost when this lookup happens. Dynamic dispatch also prevents the compiler from choosing to inline a method's code, which prevents some optimizations. We did get extra flexibility in the code that we wrote and were able to support, though, so it's a tradeoff to consider.

Object Safety is Required for Trait Objects

Not all traits can be made into trait objects; only object safe traits can. A trait is object safe as long as both of the following are true:

  • The trait does not require Self to be Sized
  • All of the trait's methods are object safe.

Self is a keyword that is an alias for the type that we're implementing traits or methods on. Sized is a marker trait like the Send and Sync traits that we talked about in Chapter 16. Sized is automatically implemented on types that have a known size at compile time, such as i32 and references. Types that do not have a known size include slices ([T]) and trait objects.

Sized is an implicit trait bound on all generic type parameters by default. Most useful operations in Rust require a type to be Sized, so making Sized a default requirement on trait bounds means we don't have to write T: Sized with most every use of generics. If we want to be able to use a trait on slices, however, we need to opt out of the Sized trait bound, and we can do that by specifying T: ?Sized as a trait bound.

Traits have a default bound of Self: ?Sized, which means that they can be implemented on types that may or may not be Sized. If we create a trait Foo that opts out of the Self: ?Sized bound, that would look like the following:

trait Foo: Sized {
    fn some_method(&self);
}

The trait Sized is now a super trait of trait Foo, which means trait Foo requires types that implement Foo (that is, Self) to be Sized. We're going to talk about super traits in more detail in Chapter 19.

The reason a trait like Foo that requires Self to be Sized is not allowed to be a trait object is that it would be impossible to implement the trait Foo for the trait object Foo: trait objects aren't sized, but Foo requires Self to be Sized. A type can't be both sized and unsized at the same time!

For the second object safety requirement that says all of a trait's methods must be object safe, a method is object safe if either:

  • It requires Self to be Sized or
  • It meets all three of the following:
    • It must not have any generic type parameters
    • Its first argument must be of type Self or a type that dereferences to the Self type (that is, it must be a method rather than an associated function and have self, &self, or &mut self as the first argument)
    • It must not use Self anywhere else in the signature except for the first argument

Those rules are a bit formal, but think of it this way: if your method requires the concrete Self type somewhere in its signature, but an object forgets the exact type that it is, there's no way that the method can use the original concrete type that it's forgotten. Same with generic type parameters that are filled in with concrete type parameters when the trait is used: the concrete types become part of the type that implements the trait. When the type is erased by the use of a trait object, there's no way to know what types to fill in the generic type parameters with.

An example of a trait whose methods are not object safe is the standard library's Clone trait. The signature for the clone method in the Clone trait looks like this:

pub trait Clone {
    fn clone(&self) -> Self;
}

String implements the Clone trait, and when we call the clone method on an instance of String we get back an instance of String. Similarly, if we call clone on an instance of Vec, we get back an instance of Vec. The signature of clone needs to know what type will stand in for Self, since that's the return type.

If we try to implement Clone on a trait like the Draw trait from Listing 17-3, we wouldn't know whether Self would end up being a Button, a SelectBox, or some other type that will implement the Draw trait in the future.

The compiler will tell you if you're trying to do something that violates the rules of object safety in regards to trait objects. For example, if we had tried to implement the Screen struct in Listing 17-4 to hold types that implement the Clone trait instead of the Draw trait, like this:

pub struct Screen {
    pub components: Vec<Box<Clone>>,
}

We'll get this error:

error[E0038]: the trait `std::clone::Clone` cannot be made into an object
 -->
  |
2 |     pub components: Vec<Box<Clone>>,
  |     ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the trait `std::clone::Clone` cannot be
  made into an object
  |
  = note: the trait cannot require that `Self : Sized`

results matching ""

    No results matching ""