11 KiB
- Feature Name:
derive_default_enum
- Start Date: 2021-04-07
- RFC PR: rust-lang/rfcs#3107
- Rust Issue: rust-lang/rust#87517
Summary
An attribute #[default]
, usable on enum
unit variants, is introduced thereby allowing some
enums to work with #[derive(Default)]
.
#[derive(Default)]
enum Padding {
Space,
Zero,
#[default]
None,
}
assert_eq!(Padding::default(), Padding::None);
The #[default]
and #[non_exhaustive]
attributes may not be used on the same variant.
Motivation
#[derive(Default)]
in more cases
Currently, #[derive(Default)]
is not usable on enum
s. To partially rectify this situation, a
#[default]
attribute is introduced that can be attached to unit variants. This allows you to use
#[derive(Default)]
on enums wherefore you can now write:
#[derive(Default)]
enum Padding {
Space,
Zero,
#[default]
None,
}
Guide-level explanation
The ability to add default values to fields of enum
variants does not mean that you can suddenly
#[derive(Default)]
on the enum. A Rust compiler will still have no idea which variant you intended
as the default. This RFC adds the ability to mark one unit variant with #[default]
:
#[derive(Default)]
enum Ingredient {
Tomato,
Onion,
#[default]
Lettuce,
}
Now the compiler knows that Ingredient::Lettuce
should be considered the default and will
accordingly generate an appropriate implementation:
impl Default for Ingredient {
fn default() -> Self {
Ingredient::Lettuce
}
}
Note that after any cfg
-stripping has occurred, it is an error to have #[default]
specified on
zero or multiple variants.
As fields may be added to #[non_exhaustive]
variants that necessitate additional bounds, it is not
permitted to place #[default]
and #[non_exhaustive]
on the same variant.
Reference-level explanation
#[default]
on enum
s
An attribute #[default]
is provided the compiler and may be legally placed solely on one
exhaustive enum
unit variants. The attribute has no semantics on its own. Placing the attribute on
anything else will result in a compilation error. Furthermore, if the attribute occurs on zero or
multiple variants of the same enum
data-type after cfg
-stripping and macro expansion is done,
this will also result in a compilation error.
#[derive(Default)]
Placing #[derive(Default)]
on an enum
named $e
is permissible if and only if that enum has
some variant $v
with #[default]
on it. In that event, the compiler shall generate the following:
implementation of Default
where the function default
is defined as:
impl ::core::default::Default for $e {
fn default() -> Self {
$e::$v
}
}
Generated bounds
As exhaustive unit variants have no inner types, no bounds shall be generated on the derived implementation. For example,
#[derive(Default)]
enum Option<T> {
#[default]
None,
Some(T),
}
would generate:
impl<T> Default for Option<T> {
fn default() -> Self {
Option::None
}
}
Interaction with #[non_exhaustive]
The Rust compiler shall not permit #[default]
and #[non_exhaustive]
to be present on the same
variant. Non-default variants may be #[non_exhaustive]
, as can the enum
itself.
Drawbacks
The usual drawback of increasing the complexity of the language applies. However, the degree to
which complexity is increased is not substantial. One notable change is the addition of an attribute
for a built-in #[derive]
, which has no precedent.
Rationale
The inability to derive Default
on enum
s has been noted on a number of occasions, with a common
suggestion being to add a #[default]
attribute (or similar) as this RFC proposes.
- [IRLO] Request: derive enum's default
- [IRLO] Deriving
Error
(comment) - [URLO] Crate for macro for default enum variant
- [URLO]
#[derive(Default)]
for enum, [not] only struct
In the interest of forwards compatibility, this RFC is limited to only exhaustive unit variants.
Were this not the case, adding a field to a #[non_exhaustive]
variant could lead to more stringent
bounds being generated, which is a breaking change. For example,
A definition of
#[derive(Default)]
enum Foo<T> {
#[default]
#[non_exhaustive]
Alpha,
Beta(T),
}
would not have any required bounds on the generated code. If this were changed to
#[derive(Default)]
enum Foo<T> {
#[default]
#[non_exhaustive]
Alpha(T),
Beta(T),
}
then any code where T: !Default
would now fail to compile, on the assumption that the generated
code for the latter has the T: Default
bound (nb: not part of this RFC).
Alternatives
One alternative is to permit the user to declare the default variant in the derive itself, such as
#[derive(Default(VariantName))]
. This has the disadvantage that the variant name is present in
multiple locations in the declaration, increasing the likelihood of a typo (and thus an error).
Another alternative is assigning the first variant to be default when #[derive(Default)]
is
present. This may prevent a #[derive(PartialOrd)]
on some enum
s where order is important (unless
the user were to explicitly assign the discriminant).
Prior art
Procedural macros
There are a number of crates which to varying degrees afford macros for default field values and associated facilities.
#[derive(Derivative)]
The crate derivative
provides the #[derivative(Default)]
attribute. With it, you may write:
#[derive(Derivative)]
#[derivative(Default)]
enum Foo {
#[derivative(Default)]
Bar,
Baz,
}
Contrast this with the equivalent in the style of this RFC:
#[derive(Default)]
enum Foo {
#[default]
Bar,
Baz,
}
Like in this RFC, derivative
allows you to derive Default
for enum
s. The syntax used in the
macro is #[derivative(Default)]
whereas the RFC provides the more ergonomic and direct notation
#[default]
in this RFC.
#[derive(SmartDefault)]
The smart-default
provides #[derive(SmartDefault)]
custom derive macro. It functions similarly
to derivative
but is specialized for the Default
trait. With it, you can write:
#[derive(SmartDefault)]
enum Foo {
#[default]
Bar,
Baz,
}
-
The same syntax
#[default]
is used both bysmart-default
and by this RFC. While it may seem that this RFC was inspired bysmart-default
, this is not the case. Rather, this notation has been independently thought of on multiple occasions. That suggests that the notation is intuitive and a solid design choice. -
There is no trait
SmartDefault
even though it is being derived. This works because#[proc_macro_derive(SmartDefault)]
is in fact not tied to any trait. That#[derive(Serialize)]
refers to the same trait as the name of the macro is from the perspective of the language's static semantics entirely coincidental.However, for users who aren't aware of this, it may seem strange that
SmartDefault
should derive for theDefault
trait.
Unresolved questions
- None so far.
Future possibilities
Non-unit variants
One significant future possibility is to have #[default]
permitted on non-unit variants. This was
originally proposed as part of this RFC but has been postponed due to disagreement over what the
generated bounds should be. This is largely due to the fact that #[derive(Default)]
on struct
s
may generate incorrect bounds.
Overriding default fields
The #[default]
attribute could be extended to override otherwise derived default values, such as
#[derive(Default)]
struct Foo {
alpha: u8,
#[default = 1]
beta: u8,
}
which would result in
impl Default for Foo {
fn default() -> Self {
Foo {
alpha: Default::default(),
beta: 1,
}
}
}
being generated.
Alternatively, dedicated syntax could be provided as proposed by @Centril:
#[derive(Default)]
struct Foo {
alpha: u8,
beta: u8 = 1,
}
If consensus can be reached on desired bounds, there should be no technical restrictions on
permitting the #[default]
attribute on a #[non_exhaustive]
variant.
Clearer documentation and more local reasoning
Providing good defaults when such exist is part of any good design that makes a physical tool, UI design, or even data-type more ergonomic and easily usable. However, that does not mean that the defaults provided can just be ignored and that they need not be understood. This is especially the case when you are moving away from said defaults and need to understand what they were. Furthermore, it is not too uncommon to see authors writing in the documentation of a data-type that a certain value is the default.
All in all, the defaults of a data-type are therefore important properties. By encoding the defaults
right where the data-type is defined gains can be made in terms of readability particularly with
regard to the ease of skimming through code. In particular, it is easier to see what the default
variant is if you can directly look at the rustdoc
page and read the previous snippet, which would
let you see the default variant without having to open up the code of the Default
implementation.
Error
trait and more
As this is the first derive macro that includes an attribute, this may open the flood gates with
regard to permitting additional macros with attributes. Crates such as thiserror
could be, in some
form or another, upstreamed to the standard library as #[derive(Error)]
, #[derive(Display)]
or
more.