Using Trait Objects That Allow for Values of Different Types
In Chapter 8, we mentioned that one limitation of vectors is that they can
store elements of only one type. We created a workaround in Listing 8-10 where
we defined a SpreadsheetCell enum that had variants to hold integers, floats,
and text. This meant we could store different types of data in each cell and
still have a vector that represented a row of cells. This is a perfectly good
solution when our interchangeable items are a fixed set of types that we know
when our code is compiled.
However, sometimes we want our library user to be able to extend the set of
types that are valid in a particular situation. To show how we might achieve
this, we’ll create an example graphical user interface (GUI) tool that iterates
through a list of items, calling a draw method on each one to draw it to the
screen—a common technique for GUI tools. We’ll create a library crate called
gui that contains the structure of a GUI library. This crate might include
some types for people to use, such as Button or TextField. In addition,
gui users will want to create their own types that can be drawn: for
instance, one programmer might add an Image and another might add a
SelectBox.
We won’t implement a fully fledged GUI library for this example but will show
how the pieces would fit together. At the time of writing the library, we can’t
know and define all the types other programmers might want to create. But we do
know that gui needs to keep track of many values of different types, and it
needs to call a draw method on each of these differently typed values. It
doesn’t need to know exactly what will happen when we call the draw method,
just that the value will have that method available for us to call.
To do this in a language with inheritance, we might define a class named
Component that has a method named draw on it. The other classes, such as
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. But because Rust
doesn’t have inheritance, we need another way to structure the gui library to
allow users to extend it with new types.
Defining a Trait for Common Behavior
To implement the behavior we want gui to have, we’ll define a trait named
Draw that will have one method named draw. Then we can define a vector that
takes a trait object. A trait object points to both an instance of a type
implementing our specified trait as well as a table used to look up trait
methods on that type at runtime. We create a trait object by specifying some
sort of pointer, such as a & reference or a Box<T> smart pointer, then the
dyn keyword, and then specifying the relevant trait. (We’ll talk about the
reason trait objects must use a pointer in Chapter 19 in the section
“Dynamically Sized Types and the Sized Trait.”) We can use trait objects in place of a generic or concrete type.
Wherever we use a trait object, Rust’s type system will ensure at compile time
that any value used in that context will implement the trait object’s trait.
Consequently, we don’t need to know all the possible types at compile time.
We’ve mentioned that in Rust, we refrain from calling structs and enums
“objects” to distinguish them from other languages’ objects. In a struct or
enum, the data in the struct fields and the behavior in impl blocks are
separated, whereas in other languages, the data and behavior combined into one
concept is often labeled an object. However, trait objects are more like
objects in other languages in the sense that they combine data and behavior.
But trait objects differ from traditional objects in that we can’t add data to
a trait object. Trait objects aren’t as generally useful as objects in other
languages: their specific purpose is to allow abstraction across common
behavior.
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 syntax should look familiar from our discussions on how to define traits
in Chapter 10. Next comes some new syntax: Listing 17-4 defines a struct named
Screen that holds a vector named components. This vector is of type
Box<dyn Draw>, which 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<dyn Draw>>,
}
Listing 17-4: Definition of the Screen struct with a
components field holding a vector of trait objects that implement the Draw
trait
On the Screen struct, we’ll define a method named run that 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<dyn Draw>>,
}
impl Screen {
pub fn run(&self) {
for component in self.components.iter() {
component.draw();
}
}
}
Listing 17-5: A run method on Screen that calls the
draw method on each component
This works differently from 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, whereas 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 restricts us to a Screen instance that has a list of components all of
type Button or all of type TextField. If you’ll only ever have homogeneous
collections, using generics and trait bounds is preferable because the
definitions will be monomorphized at compile time to use the concrete types.
On the other hand, with the method using trait objects, one Screen instance
can hold a Vec<T> that contains a Box<Button> as well as a
Box<TextField>. Let’s look at how this works, and then we’ll talk about the
runtime performance implications.
Implementing the Trait
Now we’ll add some types that implement the Draw trait. We’ll provide the
Button type. Again, actually implementing a GUI library is beyond the 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 Screen {
pub components: Vec<Box<dyn Draw>>,
}
impl Screen {
pub fn run(&self) {
for component in self.components.iter() {
component.draw();
}
}
}
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 the
fields on other components, such as a TextField type, that might have those
fields plus a placeholder field instead. Each of the types we want to draw on
the screen will implement the Draw trait but will use different code in the
draw method to define how to draw that particular type, as Button has here
(without the actual GUI code, which is beyond the scope of this chapter). The
Button type, for instance, might have an additional impl block containing
methods related to what happens when a user clicks the button. These kinds of
methods won’t apply to types like TextField.
If someone using our library decides 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
use 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
}
}
fn main() {}
Listing 17-8: Another crate using gui and implementing
the Draw trait on a SelectBox struct
Our library’s user can now write their main function to create a Screen
instance. To the Screen instance, they can add a SelectBox and a Button
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 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
}
}
use gui::{Button, Screen};
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
When we wrote the library, we didn’t know that someone might add the
SelectBox type, but our Screen implementation was able to operate on the
new type and draw it because SelectBox implements the Draw trait, which
means it implements the draw method.
This concept—of being concerned only with the messages a value responds to
rather than the value’s concrete type—is similar to the concept of 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 whether a component is an instance of a Button
or a SelectBox, it just calls the draw method on the component. By
specifying Box<dyn Draw> as the type of the values in the components
vector, we’ve defined Screen to need values that we can call the draw
method on.
The advantage of using trait objects and Rust’s type system to write code similar to code using duck typing is that we never have to check whether 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 anyway. 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
use gui::Screen;
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:
$ cargo run
Compiling gui v0.1.0 (file:///projects/gui)
error[E0277]: the trait bound `String: Draw` is not satisfied
--> src/main.rs:5:26
|
5 | components: vec![Box::new(String::from("Hi"))],
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ the trait `Draw` is not implemented for `String`
|
= note: required for the cast to the object type `dyn Draw`
error: aborting due to previous error
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0277`.
error: could not compile `gui`
To learn more, run the command again with --verbose.
This error lets us know that either we’re passing something to Screen we
didn’t mean to pass 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 the “Performance of Code Using Generics” section in Chapter 10 our discussion on the monomorphization process performed by the compiler when we use trait bounds on generics: the compiler generates nongeneric 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, which is when the compiler knows what method you’re calling at compile time. This is opposed to dynamic dispatch, which is when the compiler can’t tell at compile time which method you’re calling. In dynamic dispatch cases, the compiler emits code that at runtime will figure out which method to call.
When we use trait objects, Rust must use dynamic dispatch. The compiler doesn’t know all the types that might be used with the code that is using trait objects, so it doesn’t know which method implemented on which type to call. Instead, at runtime, Rust uses the pointers inside the trait object to know which method to call. There is a runtime cost when this lookup happens that doesn’t occur with static dispatch. Dynamic dispatch also prevents the compiler from choosing to inline a method’s code, which in turn prevents some optimizations. However, we did get extra flexibility in the code that we wrote in Listing 17-5 and were able to support in Listing 17-9, so it’s a trade-off to consider.
Object Safety Is Required for Trait Objects
You can only make object-safe traits into trait objects. Some complex rules govern all the properties that make a trait object safe, but in practice, only two rules are relevant. A trait is object safe if all the methods defined in the trait have the following properties:
- The return type isn’t
Self. - There are no generic type parameters.
The Self keyword is an alias for the type we’re implementing the traits or
methods on. Trait objects must be object safe because once you’ve used a trait
object, Rust no longer knows the concrete type that’s implementing that trait.
If a trait method returns the concrete Self type, but a trait object forgets
the exact type that Self is, there is no way the method can use the original
concrete type. The same is true of 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 forgotten through
the use of a trait object, there is 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:
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { pub trait Clone { fn clone(&self) -> Self; } }
The String type 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<T>, we get back an
instance of Vec<T>. The signature of clone needs to know what type will
stand in for Self, because that’s the return type.
The compiler will indicate when you’re trying to do something that violates the
rules of object safety in regard to trait objects. For example, let’s say we
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<dyn Clone>>,
}
We would get this error:
$ cargo build
Compiling gui v0.1.0 (file:///projects/gui)
error[E0038]: the trait `Clone` cannot be made into an object
--> src/lib.rs:2:21
|
2 | pub components: Vec<Box<dyn Clone>>,
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ `Clone` cannot be made into an object
|
= note: the trait cannot be made into an object because it requires `Self: Sized`
= note: for a trait to be "object safe" it needs to allow building a vtable to allow the call to be resolvable dynamically; for more information visit <https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/items/traits.html#object-safety>
error: aborting due to previous error
For more information about this error, try `rustc --explain E0038`.
error: could not compile `gui`
To learn more, run the command again with --verbose.
This error means you can’t use this trait as a trait object in this way. If you’re interested in more details on object safety, see Rust RFC 255.