Re: [PATCH v4] rust: adding UniqueRefCounted and UniqueRef types

[Andreas Hindborg]

"Alice Ryhl" <aliceryhl@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> On Wed, Mar 5, 2025 at 3:56 PM Oliver Mangold <oliver.mangold@xxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Alice,
>>
>> On 250305 1339, Alice Ryhl wrote:
>> > On Wed, Mar 05, 2025 at 11:31:44AM +0000, Oliver Mangold wrote:
>> >
>> > > +impl<T: UniqueRefCounted> Deref for UniqueRef<T> {
>> > > +    type Target = T;
>> > > +
>> > > +    fn deref(&self) -> &Self::Target {
>> > > +        // SAFETY: The type invariants guarantee that the object is valid.
>> > > +        unsafe { self.ptr.as_ref() }
>> > > +    }
>> > > +}
>> >
>> > What stops people from doing this?
>> >
>> > let my_unique: UniqueRef<T> = ...;
>> > let my_ref: &T = &*my_unique;
>> > let my_shared: ARef<T> = ARef::from(my_ref);
>> >
>> > Now it is no longer unique.
>> >
>> Oh, indeed. That's a serious problem. I see 2 options to deal with that:
>>
>> 1. remove ARef::From<&T>
>>
>> I checked the users of this, and it looks to me like there is rather
>> a limited number and they are easy to fix by replacing the &T with ARef<T>.
>> But I assume that wouldn't be welcome as it is intrusive nonetheless
>> and of course there is ergonomic value in having the function around.
>
> Definitely not an option. There are many users of this function that
> are in the process of being upstreamed. The ability to go &T ->
> ARef<T> is pretty fundamental for ARef.

Not having `impl From<&T> for UniqueArc` seems to work out fine.

It would be unfortunate if `impl From<&T> for ARef<T>` would prevent us
from having a unique version of `ARef`. I would say that is a valid
reason to consider removing that impl.


Best regards,
Andreas Hindborg