I'm trying to implement .or
for futures: return the same Option
if result.is_some()
and another Option
type otherwise:
trait FutureOr {
type Output;
fn or(self, f: Self::Output) -> Self::Output;
}
impl <Fut, T> FutureOr for Fut where Fut: std::future::Future<Output = Option<T>> {
type Output = Fut;
fn or(self, f: Fut) -> Self::Output {
self.then(|res| match res {
Some(res) => async { Some(res) },
None => async { f.await }
})
}
}
However, this doesn't compile:
`match` arms have incompatible types
expected opaque type `impl futures::Future<Output = std::option::Option<T>>` (`async` block)
found opaque type `impl futures::Future<Output = std::option::Option<T>>` (`async` block)
Obviously, the types are the same, but from what I gather, the compiler is complaining about the fact that the opaque
types might differ, i.e. the runtime type the generic will assume (?), could differ.
So how can I indicate to the compiler I don't need their opaque types to differ?
I tried to:
std::future::ready()
, but to my surprise this doesn't return a std::future::Future
but a std::future::Ready
, incompatible with the Future
;Future
but a Then<Future>
, and I don't know how to collect that into a Future
(into_future()
does not help, still returns Then<Future>
, but why?).UPDATE: OK, I think I am almost there. Compiler doesn't want the types to be impl
:
error: unconstrained opaque type
--> src/main.rs:19:15
|
19 | type Or = impl std::future::Future<Output = Option<T>>;
| ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
|
= note: `Or` must be used in combination with a concrete type within the same module
UPDATE: Could get rid of impl
by having generics, but compiler doesn't like that either:
error[E0207]: the type parameter `OrFut` is not constrained by the impl trait, self type, or predicates
--> src/main.rs:15:11
|
15 | impl<Fut, OrFut, OutFut, T> FutureOr for Fut
| ^^^^^ unconstrained type parameter
error[E0207]: the type parameter `OutFut` is not constrained by the impl trait, self type, or predicates
--> src/main.rs:15:18
|
15 | impl<Fut, OrFut, OutFut, T> FutureOr for Fut
| ^^^^^^ unconstrained type parameter
Maybe I need to move the implementation to the function, trying that now...
UPDATE: Closest I could come. Only thing that seems left is understanding how to return a Future
instead of a AndThen<Future>
. This can probably be resolved by using the async_trait
crate, letting the crate do the async de-sugaring for us, but I don't want to pull that in just because of a single method trait...
As written, your code is trying to treat two different futures (f
, and the return value of fn or()
) as the same type (Self::Output
). This can't work, because every distinct implementation of Future
is a different type. And, as you already discovered, it's not possible to name the type of an async
block in a way that's useful for traits (until type_alias_impl_trait
is stabilized).
Here is a rewrite that uses boxed futures, the usual workaround for TAIT. We carefully distinguish between the 3 future types: Self
, Other
, and the returned future.
use futures::{future::BoxFuture, Future};
trait FutureOr: Future + 'static {
fn or<Other>(self, f: Other) -> BoxFuture<'static, Self::Output>
where
Other: Future<Output = Self::Output> + Send + 'static;
}
impl<Fut, T> FutureOr for Fut
where
T: Send + 'static,
Fut: std::future::Future<Output = Option<T>> + Send + 'static,
{
fn or<Other>(self, f: Other) -> BoxFuture<'static, Self::Output>
where
Other: Future<Output = Self::Output> + Send + 'static,
{
Box::pin(async {
match self.await {
Some(res) => Some(res),
None => f.await,
}
})
}
}
The Send + 'static
bounds are unfortunately needed since boxed futures have to pick a specific choice of lifetime and Send
-or-!Send
.
Once we have type_alias_impl_trait
in a future stable version of Rust, we can avoid the boxing and the extra bounds:
#![feature(type_alias_impl_trait)]
use std::future::Future;
trait FutureOr<Other>: Future
where
Other: Future<Output = Self::Output>,
{
type Ored: Future<Output = Self::Output>;
fn or(self, f: Other) -> Self::Ored;
}
type OptOred<Fut, Other, T>
where
Fut: Future<Output = Option<T>>,
= impl Future<Output = Option<T>>;
impl<Fut, Other, T> FutureOr<Other> for Fut
where
Fut: std::future::Future<Output = Option<T>>,
Other: std::future::Future<Output = Self::Output>,
{
type Ored = OptOred<Fut, Other, T>;
fn or(self, f: Other) -> Self::Ored {
async {
match self.await {
Some(res) => Some(res),
None => f.await,
}
}
}
}
type Ored
is a special type alias which gets assigned the type of the async
block future in fn or()
because we returned that future from a function whose return type is that type alias. Note that Other
now has to be a type parameter on the trait so that type Ored
can refer to it, whereas in the first version the details were hidden inside dyn Future
and Other
didn't need to be mentioned.
Finally, we can still have a clean generic FutureOr
on stable, at the price of manually writing a future. In this case, I've chosen to use the pin_project
library to avoid this needing any newly written unsafe
code, but it's still fairly complex:
use std::future::Future;
use std::pin::Pin;
use std::task::{Context, Poll};
trait FutureOr<Other>: Future
where
Other: Future<Output = Self::Output>,
{
type Ored: Future<Output = Self::Output>;
fn or(self, f: Other) -> Self::Ored;
}
impl<Fut, Other, T> FutureOr<Other> for Fut
where
Fut: std::future::Future<Output = Option<T>>,
Other: std::future::Future<Output = Self::Output>,
{
type Ored = OptOred<Fut, Other>;
fn or(self, b: Other) -> Self::Ored {
OptOred {
skip_a: false,
a: self,
b,
}
}
}
#[pin_project::pin_project]
struct OptOred<A, B> {
skip_a: bool,
#[pin]
a: A,
#[pin]
b: B,
}
impl<A, B, T> Future for OptOred<A, B>
where
A: Future<Output = Option<T>>,
B: Future<Output = Option<T>>,
{
type Output = A::Output;
fn poll(self: Pin<&mut Self>, context: &mut Context<'_>) -> Poll<<Self as Future>::Output> {
let proj = self.project();
if !*proj.skip_a {
match proj.a.poll(context) {
Poll::Pending => Poll::Pending,
r @ Poll::Ready(Some(_)) => r,
Poll::Ready(None) => {
*proj.skip_a = true; // don't poll `a` again
proj.b.poll(context)
}
}
} else {
proj.b.poll(context)
}
}
}
Disclaimer: I haven't tested this code, only checked that it compiles.