Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Document internal specialization attributes #29

Merged
merged 3 commits into from
Feb 18, 2023
Merged
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
34 changes: 34 additions & 0 deletions src/code-considerations/using-unstable-lang/specialization.md
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -58,6 +58,40 @@ impl<T: Copy> RcFromSlice<T> for Rc<[T]> {

Only specialization using the `min_specialization` feature should be used. The full `specialization` feature is known to be unsound.

## Specialization attributes

There are two unstable attributes that can be used to allow a trait bound in a specializing implementation that does not appear in the default implementation.

`rustc_specialization_trait` restricts the implementations of a trait to be "always applicable". Implementing traits annotated with `rustc_specialization_trait` is unstable, so this should not be used on any stable traits exported from the standard library. `Sized` is an exception, and can have this attribute because it already cannot be implemented by an `impl` block.
the8472 marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
**Note**: `rustc_specialization_trait` only prevents incorrect monomorphizations, it does not prevent a type from being coerced between specialized and unspecialized types which can be important when specialization must be applied consistently. See [rust-lang/rust#85863](https://github.com/rust-lang/rust/issues/85863) for more details.

matthewjasper marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved
`rustc_unsafe_specialization_marker` allows specializing on a trait with no associated items. The attribute is `unsafe` because lifetime constraints from the implementations of the trait are not considered when specializing. The following example demonstrates a limitation of `rustc_unsafe_specialization_marker`, the specialized implementation is used for *all* shared reference types, not just those with `'static` lifetime. Because of this, new uses of `rustc_unsafe_specialization_marker` should be avoided.

```rust,ignore
#[rustc_unsafe_specialization_marker]
trait StaticRef {}

impl<T> StaticRef for &'static T {}

trait DoThing: Sized {
fn do_thing(self);
}

impl<T> DoThing for T {
default fn do_thing(self) {
// slow impl
}
}

impl<T: StaticRef> DoThing for T {
fn do_thing(self) {
// fast impl
}
}
```

`rustc_unsafe_specialization_marker` exists to allow existing specializations that are based on marker traits exported from `std`, such as `Copy`, `FusedIterator` or `Eq`.

## For reviewers

Look out for any `default` annotations on public trait implementations. These will need to be refactored into a private dispatch trait. Also look out for uses of specialization that do more than pick a more optimized implementation.