[TOC]
Rust’s design has taken inspiration from many existing languages and techniques, and one significant influence is functional programming. Programming in a functional style often includes using functions as values by passing them in arguments, returning them from other functions, assigning them to variables for later execution, and so forth.
In this chapter, we won’t debate the issue of what functional programming is or isn’t but will instead discuss some features of Rust that are similar to features in many languages often referred to as functional.
More specifically, we’ll cover:
- Closures, a function-like construct you can store in a variable
- Iterators, a way of processing a series of elements
- How to use closures and iterators to improve the I/O project in Chapter 12
- The performance of closures and iterators (spoiler alert: they’re faster than you might think!)
We’ve already covered some other Rust features, such as pattern matching and enums, that are also influenced by the functional style. Because mastering closures and iterators is an important part of writing idiomatic, fast Rust code, we’ll devote this entire chapter to them.
Rust’s closures are anonymous functions you can save in a variable or pass as arguments to other functions. You can create the closure in one place and then call the closure elsewhere to evaluate it in a different context. Unlike functions, closures can capture values from the scope in which they’re defined. We’ll demonstrate how these closure features allow for code reuse and behavior customization.
We’ll first examine how we can use closures to capture values from the environment they’re defined in for later use. Here’s the scenario: every so often, our T-shirt company gives away an exclusive, limited-edition shirt to someone on our mailing list as a promotion. People on the mailing list can optionally add their favorite color to their profile. If the person chosen for a free shirt has their favorite color set, they get that color shirt. If the person hasn’t specified a favorite color, they get whatever color the company currently has the most of.
There are many ways to implement this. For this example, we’re going to use an
enum called ShirtColor that has the variants Red and Blue (limiting the
number of colors available for simplicity). We represent the company’s
inventory with an Inventory struct that has a field named shirts that
contains a Vec<ShirtColor> representing the shirt colors currently in stock.
The method giveaway defined on Inventory gets the optional shirt color
preference of the free-shirt winner, and returns the shirt color the person
will get. This setup is shown in Listing 13-1.
Filename: src/main.rs
#[derive(Debug, PartialEq, Copy, Clone)]
enum ShirtColor {
Red,
Blue,
}
struct Inventory {
shirts: Vec<ShirtColor>,
}
impl Inventory {
fn giveaway(
&self,
user_preference: Option<ShirtColor>,
) -> ShirtColor {
1 user_preference.unwrap_or_else(|| self.most_stocked())
}
fn most_stocked(&self) -> ShirtColor {
let mut num_red = 0;
let mut num_blue = 0;
for color in &self.shirts {
match color {
ShirtColor::Red => num_red += 1,
ShirtColor::Blue => num_blue += 1,
}
}
if num_red > num_blue {
ShirtColor::Red
} else {
ShirtColor::Blue
}
}
}
fn main() {
let store = Inventory {
2 shirts: vec![
ShirtColor::Blue,
ShirtColor::Red,
ShirtColor::Blue,
],
};
let user_pref1 = Some(ShirtColor::Red);
3 let giveaway1 = store.giveaway(user_pref1);
println!(
"The user with preference {:?} gets {:?}",
user_pref1, giveaway1
);
let user_pref2 = None;
4 let giveaway2 = store.giveaway(user_pref2);
println!(
"The user with preference {:?} gets {:?}",
user_pref2, giveaway2
);
}
Listing 13-1: Shirt company giveaway situation
The store defined in main has two blue shirts and one red shirt remaining
to distribute for this limited-edition promotion [2]. We call the giveaway
method for a user with a preference for a red shirt [3] and a user without any
preference [4].
Again, this code could be implemented in many ways, and here, to focus on
closures, we’ve stuck to concepts you’ve already learned, except for the body
of the giveaway method that uses a closure. In the giveaway method, we get
the user preference as a parameter of type Option<ShirtColor> and call the
unwrap_or_else method on user_preference [1]. The unwrap_or_else method
on Option<T> is defined by the standard library. It takes one argument: a
closure without any arguments that returns a value T (the same type stored in
the Some variant of the Option<T>, in this case ShirtColor). If the
Option<T> is the Some variant, unwrap_or_else returns the value from
within the Some. If the Option<T> is the None variant, unwrap_or_else
calls the closure and returns the value returned by the closure.
We specify the closure expression || self.most_stocked() as the argument to
unwrap_or_else. This is a closure that takes no parameters itself (if the
closure had parameters, they would appear between the two vertical pipes). The
body of the closure calls self.most_stocked(). We’re defining the closure
here, and the implementation of unwrap_or_else will evaluate the closure
later if the result is needed.
Running this code prints the following:
The user with preference Some(Red) gets Red
The user with preference None gets Blue
One interesting aspect here is that we’ve passed a closure that calls
self.most_stocked() on the current Inventory instance. The standard library
didn’t need to know anything about the Inventory or ShirtColor types we
defined, or the logic we want to use in this scenario. The closure captures an
immutable reference to the self Inventory instance and passes it with the
code we specify to the unwrap_or_else method. Functions, on the other hand,
are not able to capture their environment in this way.
There are more differences between functions and closures. Closures don’t
usually require you to annotate the types of the parameters or the return value
like fn functions do. Type annotations are required on functions because the
types are part of an explicit interface exposed to your users. Defining this
interface rigidly is important for ensuring that everyone agrees on what types
of values a function uses and returns. Closures, on the other hand, aren’t used
in an exposed interface like this: they’re stored in variables and used without
naming them and exposing them to users of our library.
Closures are typically short and relevant only within a narrow context rather than in any arbitrary scenario. Within these limited contexts, the compiler can infer the types of the parameters and the return type, similar to how it’s able to infer the types of most variables (there are rare cases where the compiler needs closure type annotations too).
As with variables, we can add type annotations if we want to increase explicitness and clarity at the cost of being more verbose than is strictly necessary. Annotating the types for a closure would look like the definition shown in Listing 13-2. In this example, we’re defining a closure and storing it in a variable rather than defining the closure in the spot we pass it as an argument, as we did in Listing 13-1.
Filename: src/main.rs
let expensive_closure = |num: u32| -> u32 {
println!("calculating slowly...");
thread::sleep(Duration::from_secs(2));
num
};
Listing 13-2: Adding optional type annotations of the parameter and return value types in the closure
With type annotations added, the syntax of closures looks more similar to the syntax of functions. Here, we define a function that adds 1 to its parameter and a closure that has the same behavior, for comparison. We’ve added some spaces to line up the relevant parts. This illustrates how closure syntax is similar to function syntax except for the use of pipes and the amount of syntax that is optional:
fn add_one_v1 (x: u32) -> u32 { x + 1 }
let add_one_v2 = |x: u32| -> u32 { x + 1 };
let add_one_v3 = |x| { x + 1 };
let add_one_v4 = |x| x + 1 ;
The first line shows a function definition and the second line shows a fully
annotated closure definition. In the third line, we remove the type annotations
from the closure definition. In the fourth line, we remove the curly brackets,
which are optional because the closure body has only one expression. These are
all valid definitions that will produce the same behavior when they’re called.
The add_one_v3 and add_one_v4 lines require the closures to be evaluated to
be able to compile because the types will be inferred from their usage. This is
similar to let v = Vec::new(); needing either type annotations or values of
some type to be inserted into the Vec for Rust to be able to infer the type.
For closure definitions, the compiler will infer one concrete type for each of
their parameters and for their return value. For instance, Listing 13-3 shows
the definition of a short closure that just returns the value it receives as a
parameter. This closure isn’t very useful except for the purposes of this
example. Note that we haven’t added any type annotations to the definition.
Because there are no type annotations, we can call the closure with any type,
which we’ve done here with String the first time. If we then try to call
example_closure with an integer, we’ll get an error.
Filename: src/main.rs
let example_closure = |x| x;
let s = example_closure(String::from("hello"));
let n = example_closure(5);
Listing 13-3: Attempting to call a closure whose types are inferred with two different types
The compiler gives us this error:
error[E0308]: mismatched types
--> src/main.rs:5:29
|
5 | let n = example_closure(5);
| ^- help: try using a conversion method:
`.to_string()`
| |
| expected struct `String`, found integer
The first time we call example_closure with the String value, the compiler
infers the type of x and the return type of the closure to be String. Those
types are then locked into the closure in example_closure, and we get a type
error when we next try to use a different type with the same closure.
Closures can capture values from their environment in three ways, which directly map to the three ways a function can take a parameter: borrowing immutably, borrowing mutably, and taking ownership. The closure will decide which of these to use based on what the body of the function does with the captured values.
In Listing 13-4, we define a closure that captures an immutable reference to
the vector named list because it only needs an immutable reference to print
the value.
Filename: src/main.rs
fn main() {
let list = vec![1, 2, 3];
println!("Before defining closure: {:?}", list);
1 let only_borrows = || println!("From closure: {:?}", list);
println!("Before calling closure: {:?}", list);
2 only_borrows();
println!("After calling closure: {:?}", list);
}
Listing 13-4: Defining and calling a closure that captures an immutable reference
This example also illustrates that a variable can bind to a closure definition [1], and we can later call the closure by using the variable name and parentheses as if the variable name were a function name [2].
Because we can have multiple immutable references to list at the same time,
list is still accessible from the code before the closure definition, after
the closure definition but before the closure is called, and after the closure
is called. This code compiles, runs, and prints:
Before defining closure: [1, 2, 3]
Before calling closure: [1, 2, 3]
From closure: [1, 2, 3]
After calling closure: [1, 2, 3]
Next, in Listing 13-5, we change the closure body so that it adds an element to
the list vector. The closure now captures a mutable reference.
Filename: src/main.rs
fn main() {
let mut list = vec![1, 2, 3];
println!("Before defining closure: {:?}", list);
let mut borrows_mutably = || list.push(7);
borrows_mutably();
println!("After calling closure: {:?}", list);
}
Listing 13-5: Defining and calling a closure that captures a mutable reference
This code compiles, runs, and prints:
Before defining closure: [1, 2, 3]
After calling closure: [1, 2, 3, 7]
Note that there’s no longer a println! between the definition and the call of
the borrows_mutably closure: when borrows_mutably is defined, it captures a
mutable reference to list. We don’t use the closure again after the closure
is called, so the mutable borrow ends. Between the closure definition and the
closure call, an immutable borrow to print isn’t allowed because no other
borrows are allowed when there’s a mutable borrow. Try adding a println!
there to see what error message you get!
If you want to force the closure to take ownership of the values it uses in the
environment even though the body of the closure doesn’t strictly need
ownership, you can use the move keyword before the parameter list.
This technique is mostly useful when passing a closure to a new thread to move
the data so that it’s owned by the new thread. We’ll discuss threads and why
you would want to use them in detail in Chapter 16 when we talk about
concurrency, but for now, let’s briefly explore spawning a new thread using a
closure that needs the move keyword. Listing 13-6 shows Listing 13-4 modified
to print the vector in a new thread rather than in the main thread.
Filename: src/main.rs
use std::thread;
fn main() {
let list = vec![1, 2, 3];
println!("Before defining closure: {:?}", list);
1 thread::spawn(move || {
2 println!("From thread: {:?}", list)
}).join().unwrap();
}
Listing 13-6: Using move to force the closure for the thread to take
ownership of list
We spawn a new thread, giving the thread a closure to run as an argument. The
closure body prints out the list. In Listing 13-4, the closure only captured
list using an immutable reference because that’s the least amount of access
to list needed to print it. In this example, even though the closure body
still only needs an immutable reference [2], we need to specify that list
should be moved into the closure by putting the move keyword [1] at the
beginning of the closure definition. The new thread might finish before the
rest of the main thread finishes, or the main thread might finish first. If the
main thread maintains ownership of list but ends before the new thread and
drops list, the immutable reference in the thread would be invalid.
Therefore, the compiler requires that list be moved into the closure given to
the new thread so the reference will be valid. Try removing the move keyword
or using list in the main thread after the closure is defined to see what
compiler errors you get!
Once a closure has captured a reference or captured ownership of a value from the environment where the closure is defined (thus affecting what, if anything, is moved into the closure), the code in the body of the closure defines what happens to the references or values when the closure is evaluated later (thus affecting what, if anything, is moved out of the closure).
A closure body can do any of the following: move a captured value out of the closure, mutate the captured value, neither move nor mutate the value, or capture nothing from the environment to begin with.
The way a closure captures and handles values from the environment affects
which traits the closure implements, and traits are how functions and structs
can specify what kinds of closures they can use. Closures will automatically
implement one, two, or all three of these Fn traits, in an additive fashion,
depending on how the closure’s body handles the values:
FnOnceapplies to closures that can be called once. All closures implement at least this trait because all closures can be called. A closure that moves captured values out of its body will only implementFnOnceand none of the otherFntraits because it can only be called once.FnMutapplies to closures that don’t move captured values out of their body, but that might mutate the captured values. These closures can be called more than once.Fnapplies to closures that don’t move captured values out of their body and that don’t mutate captured values, as well as closures that capture nothing from their environment. These closures can be called more than once without mutating their environment, which is important in cases such as calling a closure multiple times concurrently.
Let’s look at the definition of the unwrap_or_else method on Option<T> that
we used in Listing 13-1:
impl<T> Option<T> {
pub fn unwrap_or_else<F>(self, f: F) -> T
where
F: FnOnce() -> T
{
match self {
Some(x) => x,
None => f(),
}
}
}
Recall that T is the generic type representing the type of the value in the
Some variant of an Option. That type T is also the return type of the
unwrap_or_else function: code that calls unwrap_or_else on an
Option<String>, for example, will get a String.
Next, notice that the unwrap_or_else function has the additional generic type
parameter F. The F type is the type of the parameter named f, which is
the closure we provide when calling unwrap_or_else.
The trait bound specified on the generic type F is FnOnce() -> T, which
means F must be able to be called once, take no arguments, and return a T.
Using FnOnce in the trait bound expresses the constraint that
unwrap_or_else is only going to call f one time, at most. In the body of
unwrap_or_else, we can see that if the Option is Some, f won’t be
called. If the Option is None, f will be called once. Because all
closures implement FnOnce, unwrap_or_else accepts the largest variety of
closures and is as flexible as it can be.
Note: Functions can implement all three of the
Fntraits too. If what we want to do doesn’t require capturing a value from the environment, we can use the name of a function rather than a closure where we need something that implements one of theFntraits. For example, on anOption<Vec<T>>value, we could callunwrap_or_else(Vec::new)to get a new, empty vector if the value isNone.
Now let’s look at the standard library method sort_by_key, defined on slices,
to see how that differs from unwrap_or_else and why sort_by_key uses
FnMut instead of FnOnce for the trait bound. The closure gets one argument
in the form of a reference to the current item in the slice being considered,
and returns a value of type K that can be ordered. This function is useful
when you want to sort a slice by a particular attribute of each item. In
Listing 13-7, we have a list of Rectangle instances and we use sort_by_key
to order them by their width attribute from low to high.
Filename: src/main.rs
#[derive(Debug)]
struct Rectangle {
width: u32,
height: u32,
}
fn main() {
let mut list = [
Rectangle { width: 10, height: 1 },
Rectangle { width: 3, height: 5 },
Rectangle { width: 7, height: 12 },
];
list.sort_by_key(|r| r.width);
println!("{:#?}", list);
}
Listing 13-7: Using sort_by_key to order rectangles by width
This code prints:
[
Rectangle {
width: 3,
height: 5,
},
Rectangle {
width: 7,
height: 12,
},
Rectangle {
width: 10,
height: 1,
},
]
The reason sort_by_key is defined to take an FnMut closure is that it calls
the closure multiple times: once for each item in the slice. The closure |r| r.width doesn’t capture, mutate, or move anything out from its environment, so
it meets the trait bound requirements.
In contrast, Listing 13-8 shows an example of a closure that implements just
the FnOnce trait, because it moves a value out of the environment. The
compiler won’t let us use this closure with sort_by_key.
Filename: src/main.rs
--snip--
fn main() {
let mut list = [
Rectangle { width: 10, height: 1 },
Rectangle { width: 3, height: 5 },
Rectangle { width: 7, height: 12 },
];
let mut sort_operations = vec![];
let value = String::from("by key called");
list.sort_by_key(|r| {
sort_operations.push(value);
r.width
});
println!("{:#?}", list);
}
Listing 13-8: Attempting to use an FnOnce closure with sort_by_key
This is a contrived, convoluted way (that doesn’t work) to try and count the
number of times sort_by_key gets called when sorting list. This code
attempts to do this counting by pushing value—a String from the closure’s
environment—into the sort_operations vector. The closure captures value and
then moves value out of the closure by transferring ownership of value to
the sort_operations vector. This closure can be called once; trying to call
it a second time wouldn’t work because value would no longer be in the
environment to be pushed into sort_operations again! Therefore, this closure
only implements FnOnce. When we try to compile this code, we get this error
that value can’t be moved out of the closure because the closure must
implement FnMut:
error[E0507]: cannot move out of `value`, a captured variable in an `FnMut`
closure
--> src/main.rs:18:30
|
15 | let value = String::from("by key called");
| ----- captured outer variable
16 |
17 | list.sort_by_key(|r| {
| ______________________-
18 | | sort_operations.push(value);
| | ^^^^^ move occurs because `value` has
type `String`, which does not implement the `Copy` trait
19 | | r.width
20 | | });
| |_____- captured by this `FnMut` closure
The error points to the line in the closure body that moves value out of the
environment. To fix this, we need to change the closure body so that it doesn’t
move values out of the environment. Keeping a counter in the environment and
incrementing its value in the closure body is a more straightforward way to
count the number of times sort_by_key is called. The closure in Listing 13-9
works with sort_by_key because it is only capturing a mutable reference to
the num_sort_operations counter and can therefore be called more than once.
Filename: src/main.rs
--snip--
fn main() {
--snip--
let mut num_sort_operations = 0;
list.sort_by_key(|r| {
num_sort_operations += 1;
r.width
});
println!(
"{:#?}, sorted in {num_sort_operations} operations",
list
);
}
Listing 13-9: Using an FnMut closure with sort_by_key is allowed.
The Fn traits are important when defining or using functions or types that
make use of closures. In the next section, we’ll discuss iterators. Many
iterator methods take closure arguments, so keep these closure details in mind
as we continue!
The iterator pattern allows you to perform some task on a sequence of items in turn. An iterator is responsible for the logic of iterating over each item and determining when the sequence has finished. When you use iterators, you don’t have to reimplement that logic yourself.
In Rust, iterators are lazy, meaning they have no effect until you call
methods that consume the iterator to use it up. For example, the code in
Listing 13-10 creates an iterator over the items in the vector v1 by calling
the iter method defined on Vec<T>. This code by itself doesn’t do anything
useful.
let v1 = vec![1, 2, 3];
let v1_iter = v1.iter();
Listing 13-10: Creating an iterator
The iterator is stored in the v1_iter variable. Once we’ve created an
iterator, we can use it in a variety of ways. In Listing 3-5, we iterated over
an array using a for loop to execute some code on each of its items. Under
the hood, this implicitly created and then consumed an iterator, but we glossed
over how exactly that works until now.
In the example in Listing 13-11, we separate the creation of the iterator from
the use of the iterator in the for loop. When the for loop is called using
the iterator in v1_iter, each element in the iterator is used in one
iteration of the loop, which prints out each value.
let v1 = vec![1, 2, 3];
let v1_iter = v1.iter();
for val in v1_iter {
println!("Got: {val}");
}
Listing 13-11: Using an iterator in a for loop
In languages that don’t have iterators provided by their standard libraries, you would likely write this same functionality by starting a variable at index 0, using that variable to index into the vector to get a value, and incrementing the variable value in a loop until it reached the total number of items in the vector.
Iterators handle all of that logic for you, cutting down on repetitive code you could potentially mess up. Iterators give you more flexibility to use the same logic with many different kinds of sequences, not just data structures you can index into, like vectors. Let’s examine how iterators do that.
All iterators implement a trait named Iterator that is defined in the
standard library. The definition of the trait looks like this:
pub trait Iterator {
type Item;
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<Self::Item>;
// methods with default implementations elided
}
Notice that this definition uses some new syntax: type Item and Self::Item,
which are defining an associated type with this trait. We’ll talk about
associated types in depth in Chapter 19. For now, all you need to know is that
this code says implementing the Iterator trait requires that you also define
an Item type, and this Item type is used in the return type of the next
method. In other words, the Item type will be the type returned from the
iterator.
The Iterator trait only requires implementors to define one method: the
next method, which returns one item of the iterator at a time, wrapped in
Some, and, when iteration is over, returns None.
We can call the next method on iterators directly; Listing 13-12 demonstrates
what values are returned from repeated calls to next on the iterator created
from the vector.
Filename: src/lib.rs
#[test]
fn iterator_demonstration() {
let v1 = vec![1, 2, 3];
let mut v1_iter = v1.iter();
assert_eq!(v1_iter.next(), Some(&1));
assert_eq!(v1_iter.next(), Some(&2));
assert_eq!(v1_iter.next(), Some(&3));
assert_eq!(v1_iter.next(), None);
}
Listing 13-12: Calling the next method on an iterator
Note that we needed to make v1_iter mutable: calling the next method on an
iterator changes internal state that the iterator uses to keep track of where
it is in the sequence. In other words, this code consumes, or uses up, the
iterator. Each call to next eats up an item from the iterator. We didn’t need
to make v1_iter mutable when we used a for loop because the loop took
ownership of v1_iter and made it mutable behind the scenes.
Also note that the values we get from the calls to next are immutable
references to the values in the vector. The iter method produces an iterator
over immutable references. If we want to create an iterator that takes
ownership of v1 and returns owned values, we can call into_iter instead of
iter. Similarly, if we want to iterate over mutable references, we can call
iter_mut instead of iter.
The Iterator trait has a number of different methods with default
implementations provided by the standard library; you can find out about these
methods by looking in the standard library API documentation for the Iterator
trait. Some of these methods call the next method in their definition, which
is why you’re required to implement the next method when implementing the
Iterator trait.
Methods that call next are called consuming adapters because calling them
uses up the iterator. One example is the sum method, which takes ownership of
the iterator and iterates through the items by repeatedly calling next, thus
consuming the iterator. As it iterates through, it adds each item to a running
total and returns the total when iteration is complete. Listing 13-13 has a
test illustrating a use of the sum method.
Filename: src/lib.rs
#[test]
fn iterator_sum() {
let v1 = vec![1, 2, 3];
let v1_iter = v1.iter();
let total: i32 = v1_iter.sum();
assert_eq!(total, 6);
}
Listing 13-13: Calling the sum method to get the total of all items in the
iterator
We aren’t allowed to use v1_iter after the call to sum because sum takes
ownership of the iterator we call it on.
Iterator adapters are methods defined on the Iterator trait that don’t
consume the iterator. Instead, they produce different iterators by changing
some aspect of the original iterator.
Listing 13-14 shows an example of calling the iterator adapter method map,
which takes a closure to call on each item as the items are iterated through.
The map method returns a new iterator that produces the modified items. The
closure here creates a new iterator in which each item from the vector will be
incremented by 1.
Filename: src/main.rs
let v1: Vec<i32> = vec![1, 2, 3];
v1.iter().map(|x| x + 1);
Listing 13-14: Calling the iterator adapter map to create a new iterator
However, this code produces a warning:
warning: unused `Map` that must be used
--> src/main.rs:4:5
|
4 | v1.iter().map(|x| x + 1);
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: `#[warn(unused_must_use)]` on by default
= note: iterators are lazy and do nothing unless consumed
The code in Listing 13-14 doesn’t do anything; the closure we’ve specified never gets called. The warning reminds us why: iterator adapters are lazy, and we need to consume the iterator here.
To fix this warning and consume the iterator, we’ll use the collect method,
which we used with env::args in Listing 12-1. This method consumes the
iterator and collects the resultant values into a collection data type.
In Listing 13-15, we collect into a vector the results of iterating over the
iterator that’s returned from the call to map. This vector will end up
containing each item from the original vector, incremented by 1.
Filename: src/main.rs
let v1: Vec<i32> = vec![1, 2, 3];
let v2: Vec<_> = v1.iter().map(|x| x + 1).collect();
assert_eq!(v2, vec![2, 3, 4]);
Listing 13-15: Calling the map method to create a new iterator, and then
calling the collect method to consume the new iterator and create a vector
Because map takes a closure, we can specify any operation we want to perform
on each item. This is a great example of how closures let you customize some
behavior while reusing the iteration behavior that the Iterator trait
provides.
You can chain multiple calls to iterator adapters to perform complex actions in a readable way. But because all iterators are lazy, you have to call one of the consuming adapter methods to get results from calls to iterator adapters.
Many iterator adapters take closures as arguments, and commonly the closures we’ll specify as arguments to iterator adapters will be closures that capture their environment.
For this example, we’ll use the filter method that takes a closure. The
closure gets an item from the iterator and returns a bool. If the closure
returns true, the value will be included in the iteration produced by
filter. If the closure returns false, the value won’t be included.
In Listing 13-16, we use filter with a closure that captures the shoe_size
variable from its environment to iterate over a collection of Shoe struct
instances. It will return only shoes that are the specified size.
Filename: src/lib.rs
#[derive(PartialEq, Debug)]
struct Shoe {
size: u32,
style: String,
}
fn shoes_in_size(shoes: Vec<Shoe>, shoe_size: u32) -> Vec<Shoe> {
shoes.into_iter().filter(|s| s.size == shoe_size).collect()
}
#[cfg(test)]
mod tests {
use super::*;
#[test]
fn filters_by_size() {
let shoes = vec![
Shoe {
size: 10,
style: String::from("sneaker"),
},
Shoe {
size: 13,
style: String::from("sandal"),
},
Shoe {
size: 10,
style: String::from("boot"),
},
];
let in_my_size = shoes_in_size(shoes, 10);
assert_eq!(
in_my_size,
vec![
Shoe {
size: 10,
style: String::from("sneaker")
},
Shoe {
size: 10,
style: String::from("boot")
},
]
);
}
}
Listing 13-16: Using the filter method with a closure that captures
shoe_size
The shoes_in_size function takes ownership of a vector of shoes and a shoe
size as parameters. It returns a vector containing only shoes of the specified
size.
In the body of shoes_in_size, we call into_iter to create an iterator that
takes ownership of the vector. Then we call filter to adapt that iterator
into a new iterator that only contains elements for which the closure returns
true.
The closure captures the shoe_size parameter from the environment and
compares the value with each shoe’s size, keeping only shoes of the size
specified. Finally, calling collect gathers the values returned by the
adapted iterator into a vector that’s returned by the function.
The test shows that when we call shoes_in_size, we get back only shoes that
have the same size as the value we specified.
With this new knowledge about iterators, we can improve the I/O project in
Chapter 12 by using iterators to make places in the code clearer and more
concise. Let’s look at how iterators can improve our implementation of the
Config::build function and the search function.
In Listing 12-6, we added code that took a slice of String values and created
an instance of the Config struct by indexing into the slice and cloning the
values, allowing the Config struct to own those values. In Listing 13-17,
we’ve reproduced the implementation of the Config::build function as it was
in Listing 12-23.
Filename: src/lib.rs
impl Config {
pub fn build(
args: &[String]
) -> Result<Config, &'static str> {
if args.len() < 3 {
return Err("not enough arguments");
}
let query = args[1].clone();
let file_path = args[2].clone();
let ignore_case = env::var("IGNORE_CASE").is_ok();
Ok(Config {
query,
file_path,
ignore_case,
})
}
}
Listing 13-17: Reproduction of the Config::build function from Listing 12-23
At the time, we said not to worry about the inefficient clone calls because
we would remove them in the future. Well, that time is now!
We needed clone here because we have a slice with String elements in the
parameter args, but the build function doesn’t own args. To return
ownership of a Config instance, we had to clone the values from the query
and filename fields of Config so the Config instance can own its values.
With our new knowledge about iterators, we can change the build function to
take ownership of an iterator as its argument instead of borrowing a slice.
We’ll use the iterator functionality instead of the code that checks the length
of the slice and indexes into specific locations. This will clarify what the
Config::build function is doing because the iterator will access the values.
Once Config::build takes ownership of the iterator and stops using indexing
operations that borrow, we can move the String values from the iterator into
Config rather than calling clone and making a new allocation.
Open your I/O project’s src/main.rs file, which should look like this:
Filename: src/main.rs
fn main() {
let args: Vec<String> = env::args().collect();
let config = Config::build(&args).unwrap_or_else(|err| {
eprintln!("Problem parsing arguments: {err}");
process::exit(1);
});
--snip--
}
We’ll first change the start of the main function that we had in Listing
12-24 to the code in Listing 13-18, which this time uses an iterator. This
won’t compile until we update Config::build as well.
Filename: src/main.rs
fn main() {
let config =
Config::build(env::args()).unwrap_or_else(|err| {
eprintln!("Problem parsing arguments: {err}");
process::exit(1);
});
--snip--
}
Listing 13-18: Passing the return value of env::args to Config::build
The env::args function returns an iterator! Rather than collecting the
iterator values into a vector and then passing a slice to Config::build, now
we’re passing ownership of the iterator returned from env::args to
Config::build directly.
Next, we need to update the definition of Config::build. In your I/O
project’s src/lib.rs file, let’s change the signature of Config::build to
look like Listing 13-19. This still won’t compile, because we need to update
the function body.
Filename: src/lib.rs
impl Config {
pub fn build(
mut args: impl Iterator<Item = String>,
) -> Result<Config, &'static str> {
--snip--
Listing 13-19: Updating the signature of Config::build to expect an iterator
The standard library documentation for the env::args function shows that the
type of the iterator it returns is std::env::Args, and that type implements
the Iterator trait and returns String values.
We’ve updated the signature of the Config::build function so the parameter
args has a generic type with the trait bounds impl Iterator<Item = String>
instead of &[String]. This usage of the impl Trait syntax we discussed in
“Traits as Parameters” on page XX means that args can be any type that
implements the Iterator type and returns String items.
Because we’re taking ownership of args and we’ll be mutating args by
iterating over it, we can add the mut keyword into the specification of the
args parameter to make it mutable.
Next, we’ll fix the body of Config::build. Because args implements the
Iterator trait, we know we can call the next method on it! Listing 13-20
updates the code from Listing 12-23 to use the next method.
Filename: src/lib.rs
impl Config {
pub fn build(
mut args: impl Iterator<Item = String>,
) -> Result<Config, &'static str> {
args.next();
let query = match args.next() {
Some(arg) => arg,
None => return Err("Didn't get a query string"),
};
let file_path = match args.next() {
Some(arg) => arg,
None => return Err("Didn't get a file path"),
};
let ignore_case = env::var("IGNORE_CASE").is_ok();
Ok(Config {
query,
file_path,
ignore_case,
})
}
}
Listing 13-20: Changing the body of Config::build to use iterator methods
Remember that the first value in the return value of env::args is the name of
the program. We want to ignore that and get to the next value, so first we call
next and do nothing with the return value. Then we call next to get the
value we want to put in the query field of Config. If next returns
Some, we use a match to extract the value. If it returns None, it means
not enough arguments were given and we return early with an Err value. We do
the same thing for the filename value.
We can also take advantage of iterators in the search function in our I/O
project, which is reproduced here in Listing 13-21 as it was in Listing 12-19.
Filename: src/lib.rs
pub fn search<'a>(
query: &str,
contents: &'a str,
) -> Vec<&'a str> {
let mut results = Vec::new();
for line in contents.lines() {
if line.contains(query) {
results.push(line);
}
}
results
}
Listing 13-21: The implementation of the search function from Listing 12-19
We can write this code in a more concise way using iterator adapter methods.
Doing so also lets us avoid having a mutable intermediate results vector. The
functional programming style prefers to minimize the amount of mutable state to
make code clearer. Removing the mutable state might enable a future enhancement
to make searching happen in parallel because we wouldn’t have to manage
concurrent access to the results vector. Listing 13-22 shows this change.
Filename: src/lib.rs
pub fn search<'a>(
query: &str,
contents: &'a str,
) -> Vec<&'a str> {
contents
.lines()
.filter(|line| line.contains(query))
.collect()
}
Listing 13-22: Using iterator adapter methods in the implementation of the
search function
Recall that the purpose of the search function is to return all lines in
contents that contain the query. Similar to the filter example in Listing
13-16, this code uses the filter adapter to keep only the lines for which
line.contains(query) returns true. We then collect the matching lines into
another vector with collect. Much simpler! Feel free to make the same change
to use iterator methods in the search_case_insensitive function as well.
The next logical question is which style you should choose in your own code and why: the original implementation in Listing 13-21 or the version using iterators in Listing 13-22. Most Rust programmers prefer to use the iterator style. It’s a bit tougher to get the hang of at first, but once you get a feel for the various iterator adapters and what they do, iterators can be easier to understand. Instead of fiddling with the various bits of looping and building new vectors, the code focuses on the high-level objective of the loop. This abstracts away some of the commonplace code so it’s easier to see the concepts that are unique to this code, such as the filtering condition each element in the iterator must pass.
But are the two implementations truly equivalent? The intuitive assumption might be that the lower-level loop will be faster. Let’s talk about performance.
To determine whether to use loops or iterators, you need to know which
implementation is faster: the version of the search function with an explicit
for loop or the version with iterators.
We ran a benchmark by loading the entire contents of The Adventures of
Sherlock Holmes by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle into a String and looking for the
word the in the contents. Here are the results of the benchmark on the
version of search using the for loop and the version using iterators:
test bench_search_for ... bench: 19,620,300 ns/iter (+/- 915,700)
test bench_search_iter ... bench: 19,234,900 ns/iter (+/- 657,200)
The iterator version was slightly faster! We won’t explain the benchmark code here because the point is not to prove that the two versions are equivalent but to get a general sense of how these two implementations compare performance-wise.
For a more comprehensive benchmark, you should check using various texts of
various sizes as the contents, different words and words of different lengths
as the query, and all kinds of other variations. The point is this:
iterators, although a high-level abstraction, get compiled down to roughly the
same code as if you’d written the lower-level code yourself. Iterators are one
of Rust’s zero-cost abstractions, by which we mean that using the abstraction
imposes no additional runtime overhead. This is analogous to how Bjarne
Stroustrup, the original designer and implementor of C++, defines
zero-overhead in “Foundations of C++” (2012):
In general, C++ implementations obey the zero-overhead principle: What you don’t use, you don’t pay for. And further: What you do use, you couldn’t hand code any better.As another example, the following code is taken from an audio decoder. The decoding algorithm uses the linear prediction mathematical operation to estimate future values based on a linear function of the previous samples. This code uses an iterator chain to do some math on three variables in scope: a
bufferslice of data, an array of 12coefficients, and an amount by which to shift data inqlp_shift. We’ve declared the variables within this example but not given them any values; although this code doesn’t have much meaning outside of its context, it’s still a concise, real-world example of how Rust translates high-level ideas to low-level code.
let buffer: &mut [i32];
let coefficients: [i64; 12];
let qlp_shift: i16;
for i in 12..buffer.len() {
let prediction = coefficients.iter()
.zip(&buffer[i - 12..i])
.map(|(&c, &s)| c * s as i64)
.sum::<i64>() >> qlp_shift;
let delta = buffer[i];
buffer[i] = prediction as i32 + delta;
}
To calculate the value of prediction, this code iterates through each of the
12 values in coefficients and uses the zip method to pair the coefficient
values with the previous 12 values in buffer. Then, for each pair, it
multiplies the values together, sums all the results, and shifts the bits in
the sum qlp_shift bits to the right.
Calculations in applications like audio decoders often prioritize performance
most highly. Here, we’re creating an iterator, using two adapters, and then
consuming the value. What assembly code would this Rust code compile to? Well,
as of this writing, it compiles down to the same assembly you’d write by hand.
There’s no loop at all corresponding to the iteration over the values in
coefficients: Rust knows that there are 12 iterations, so it “unrolls” the
loop. Unrolling is an optimization that removes the overhead of the loop
controlling code and instead generates repetitive code for each iteration of
the loop.
All of the coefficients get stored in registers, which means accessing the values is very fast. There are no bounds checks on the array access at runtime. All of these optimizations that Rust is able to apply make the resultant code extremely efficient. Now that you know this, you can use iterators and closures without fear! They make code seem like it’s higher level but don’t impose a runtime performance penalty for doing so.
Closures and iterators are Rust features inspired by functional programming language ideas. They contribute to Rust’s capability to clearly express high-level ideas at low-level performance. The implementations of closures and iterators are such that runtime performance is not affected. This is part of Rust’s goal to strive to provide zero-cost abstractions.
Now that we’ve improved the expressiveness of our I/O project, let’s look at
some more features of cargo that will help us share the project with the
world.