Reputation: 13297
I want to create an array. I don't need the array to be mutable, and at the time of creation, I have all the information I need to calculate the i-th member of the array. However, can't figure out how to create an immutable array in Rust.
Here's what I have now:
let mut my_array: [f32; 4] = [0.0; 4];
for i in 0..4 {
// some calculation, doesn't matter what exactly
my_array[i] = some_function(i);
}
And here's what I want:
let my_array: [f32; 4] = array_factory!(4, some_function);
How can I achieve that in Rust?
Upvotes: 7
Views: 2485
Reputation: 1259
Now, there is a (pretty popular) crate to do that exact thing: array_init
use array_init::array_init;
let my_array: [f32; 4] = array_init(some_function);
There is a lot of discussion and evolution around creating abstractions around arrays inside the rust team.
For example, the map function for arrays is already available, and it will become stable in rust 1.55.
If you wanted to, you could implement your function with map:
#![feature(array_map)]
let mut i = 0usize;
result = [(); 4].map(|_| {v = some_function(i);i = i+1; v})
And there are even discussions around your particular problem, you can look here
Upvotes: 3
Reputation: 65782
Here's the macro definition with sample usage:
macro_rules! array_factory(
($size: expr, $factory: expr) => ({
unsafe fn get_item_ptr<T>(slice: *mut [T], index: usize) -> *mut T {
(slice as *mut T).offset(index as isize)
}
let mut arr = ::std::mem::MaybeUninit::<[_; $size]>::uninit();
unsafe {
for i in 0..$size {
::std::ptr::write(get_item_ptr(arr.as_mut_ptr(), i), $factory(i));
}
arr.assume_init()
}
});
);
fn some_function(i: usize) -> f32 {
i as f32 * 3.125
}
fn main() {
let my_array: [f32; 4] = array_factory!(4, some_function);
println!("{} {} {} {}", my_array[0], my_array[1], my_array[2], my_array[3]);
}
The macro's body is essentially your first version, but with a few changes:
unsafe
block. Here, we're using MaybeUninit
, which was introduced in Rust 1.36 to replace mem::uninitialized
1.std::ptr::write()
due to the fact that the array is uninitialized. Assignment would try to drop an uninitialized value in the array; the effects depend on the array item type (for types that implement Copy
, like f32
, it has no effect; for other types, it could crash).arr.assume_init()
. The result of that block expression is therefore arr.assume_init()
.Instead of using unsafe features, we can make a safe version of this macro; however, it requires that the array item type implements the Default
trait. Note that we must use normal assignment here, to ensure that the default values in the array are properly dropped.
macro_rules! array_factory(
($size: expr, $factory: expr) => ({
let mut arr = [::std::default::Default::default(), ..$size];
for i in 0..$size {
arr[i] = $factory(i);
}
arr
});
)
1 And for a good reason. The previous version of this answer, which used mem::uninitialized
, was not memory-safe: if a panic occurred while initializing the array (because the factory function panicked), and the array's item type had a destructor, the compiler would insert code to call the destructor on every item in the array; even the items that were not initialized yet! MaybeUninit
avoids this problem because it wraps the value being initialized in ManuallyDrop
, which is a magic type in Rust that prevents the destructor from running automatically.
Upvotes: 6
Reputation: 28097
Try to make your macro expand to this:
let my_array = {
let mut tmp: [f32, ..4u] = [0.0, ..4u];
for i in range(0u, 4u) {
tmp[i] = somefunction(i);
}
tmp
};
What I don't know is whether this is properly optimized to avoid moving tmp
to my_array
. But for 4 f32 values (128 bits) it probably does not make a significant difference.
Upvotes: 2