speice.io/_posts/2020-07-08-on-implementing-futures.md

layout	title	description	category	tags
post	Tips for Implementing `Future`			python

When support for async/await launched in Rust, it came with a couple of technical caveats; it was deemed more beneficial to release a minimum viable product than wait for a feature-complete release. So far, this model seems to have worked out well. Asynchronous code originally required thread-local storage for context tracking which mean that it could only be used in projects that included the Rust standard library. It wasn't a hard requirement; nothing about the async design mandated context tracking in this way. But given that most users of asynchronous code relied on the standard library anyway, supporting asynchronous no_std projects was left as something to be addressed later. After some fantastic work, thread-local storage is no longer used and there's some incredibly cool work being done to enable Rust on no_std and embedded systems. While asynchronous programming is very frequently used to model disk or network I/O, the same principles can be applied to monitoring signals received from GPIO pins.

NOTE: Should I mention something about how cool it is that we can have async without needing heap allocations or type erasure like in every other async implementation?

One other missing feature in the initial async support was being able to write traits that contained async fn methods Normally, when an async fn function is declared, the compiler does some magic to the function signature:

struct R;

// When you write a function like this:
async fn read_bytes(s: TcpStream) -> R { /* ... */ }

// ...the compiler effectively transforms it into this:
fn read_bytes(s: TcpStream) -> impl Future<Output = R> { /* ... */ }

This special return type (the impl Future thing) tells the compiler "I have no idea what the exact return type will be, but it will be something that implements Future, just figure it out for me." If you're writing static or struct functions, that's no issue, the compiler can figure everything out for you.

However, this "figure it out for me" mentality doesn't work when used with traits. The reasons are varied and complex and out of scope for this discussion. But if we want to mix traits and asynchronous code, we simply need to make sure the trait method returns a type that implements the Future trait:

use std::future::Future;
use std::pin::Pin;
use std::task::{Context, Poll};

pub struct Byte(u8);

// Implementing this section of the code is what we'll be talking about.
// vvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvvv
impl Future for Byte {
    type Output = u8;

    fn poll(self: Pin<&mut Self>, _cx: &mut Context<'_>) -> Poll<Self::Output> {
        return Poll::Ready(self.0);
    }
}
// ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

pub trait ByteReader {
    fn get_byte(&self) -> Byte;
}

pub async fn my_function(b: impl ByteReader) -> u8 {
    b.get_byte().await
}

Because of some Rust-specific issues (the Pin/Unpin system, unhelpful compiler messages), implementing Future directly can be rather difficult. It's possible to use crates like async_trait to work around the limitation, but if you're interested in building your own futures, these techniques should make the process at least a bit easier.

Implement functionality before structure

Principle: if possible, implement the desired behavior in a separate function where all state is provided as arguments.

It's helpful to de-couple "what you need in order to function" from "how you get those things"; are you supposed to use #[pin_project] or let Self { } = &mut *self or maybe just &mut self.value? Instead, just pass everything that needs polled as Pin<&mut Thing> and deal with it later.

Caveat 1: Don't reference this method until ready

Errors elsewhere in the code can mask issues in the implementation, or make it difficult to understand if there are issues in specification (the struct) or implementation (the function).

Caveat 2: Don't re-use type names

Can reconcile the names afterward, but it's helpful to separate issues of implementation from specification:

use futures_io::AsyncBufRead;
use std::future::Future;
use std::pin::Pin;
use std::task::{Context, Poll};

fn poll_once<R1: AsyncBufRead + ?Sized>(mut reader: Pin<&mut R1>, cx: &mut Context<'_>) -> Poll<()> {
    reader.as_mut().poll_fill_buf(cx);
    return Poll::Ready(());
}

struct MyStruct<'a, R2: ?Sized> {
    reader: &'a R2,
}

impl<R3: AsyncBufRead + ?Sized + Unpin> Future for MyStruct<'_, R3> {
    type Output = ();

    fn poll(self: Pin<&mut Self>, cx: &mut Context<'_>) -> Poll<Self::Output> {
        poll_once(Pin::new(&mut self.reader), cx)
    }
}

error[E0277]: the trait bound `&R3: futures_io::if_std::AsyncBufRead` is not satisfied
  --> src/lib.rs:19:9
   |
6  | fn poll_once<R1: AsyncBufRead + ?Sized>(mut reader: Pin<&mut R1>, cx: &mut Context<'_>) -> Poll<()> {
   |                  ------------ required by this bound in `poll_once`
...
19 |         poll_once(Pin::new(&mut self.reader), cx)
   |         ^^^^^^^^^ the trait `futures_io::if_std::AsyncBufRead` is not implemented for `&R3`

I need to reduce this example though.

Don't feel bad about requiring Unpin

Principle: don't require it unless you need to, but don't hesitate to add it if the compiler thinks you should.

use futures_io::AsyncBufRead;
use std::future::Future;
use std::pin::Pin;
use std::task::{Context, Poll};

fn poll_once<R1: AsyncBufRead + ?Sized>(mut reader: Pin<&mut R1>, cx: &mut Context<'_>) -> Poll<()> {
    reader.as_mut().poll_fill_buf(cx);
    return Poll::Ready(());
}

struct MyStruct<'a, R2: ?Sized> {
    reader: &'a R2,
}

impl<R3: AsyncBufRead + ?Sized> Future for MyStruct<'_, R3> {
    type Output = ();

    fn poll(self: Pin<&mut Self>, cx: &mut Context<'_>) -> Poll<Self::Output> {
        poll_once(Pin::new(&mut self.reader), cx)
    }
}

The type bounds for R1 and R3 seem to be identical, but are actually slightly different:

error[E0277]: `R3` cannot be unpinned
  --> src/lib.rs:19:9
   |
6  | fn poll_once<R1: AsyncBufRead + ?Sized>(mut reader: Pin<&mut R1>, cx: &mut Context<'_>) -> Poll<()> {
   |                  ------------ required by this bound in `poll_once`
...
19 |         poll_once(Pin::new(&mut self.reader), cx)
   |         ^^^^^^^^^ the trait `std::marker::Unpin` is not implemented for `R3`
   |
   = note: required because of the requirements on the impl of `futures_io::if_std::AsyncBufRead` for `&mut R3`
help: consider further restricting this bound
   |
15 | impl<R3: AsyncBufRead + ?Sized + std::marker::Unpin> Future for MyStruct<'_, R3> {
   |                                ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Don't feel bad about fallbacks

When used sparingly, either #[async_trait] or Box::pin(async move {}) can enable async functionality in code that will later not need the allocations. Use the escape hatch when you need to such that you can continue making incremental improvements later.