| layout | title | category | tags | order | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
style-guide |
Rust Style Guide |
style-guide |
|
3 |
Like many style guides, this Rust style guide exists for two primary reasons. The first is to provide guidelines that result in a consistent code style across all of the Enso codebases, while the second is to guide people towards a style that is expressive while still easy to read and understand.
In general, it aims to create a set of 'zero-thought' rules in order to ease the programmer burden; there is usually only one way to lay out code correctly.
This section explains the rules for visually laying out your code. They provide a robust set of guidelines for creating a consistent visual to the code.
Code style is far more than just the visual formatting of the code, especially as formatting can often be automated. According to the documentation of rustfmt, "formatting code is a mostly mechanical task which takes both time and mental effort." While, in many cases, the programmer can be relieved of this burden through use of an automated formatter, it is sometimes the case that such a tool imposes more cognitive load in programmers. With rustfmt, programmers tend to have to refactor long lines to use variables, and move code to specific modules or sections lest rustfmt produce code that is hard to read and write. Thus, it is very important to write code in such a way that we can be proud of its quality.
Due to the fact that rustfmt doesn't support multiple of our requirements, we
have created a guide for how to format Rust code for this project. Please read
it carefully.
We hope that, in the future, rustfmt will come to support many of the things
described below, but even so, many portions of this guide will need to be
handled manually.
Each line in the source file should be of a maximum of 100 characters of text. This includes comments.
The imports section at the top of a file should be separated into four groups. These groups should be sorted in alphabetical order and are divided as follows:
// Group 1: sub-module definitions.
// Group 2: prelude-like imports.
// Group 3: local-crate imports.
// Group 4: external imports.Please look at the following by way of example:
pub mod display_object;
use crate::prelude::*;
use crate::closure;
use crate::data::opt_vec::OptVec;
use crate::dirty;
use crate::system::web::group;
use nalgebra::Matrix4;
use nalgebra::Vector3;Rust source files should be divided into sections, with a header placed before the definition of each new concept in a file.
By the term "concept," we are referring primarily to a structure with a set of related implementations. However if the related implementations rely on some simple helper structs, these may also be defined in the same section. A section should have a header as follows.
// ===================
// === SectionName ===
// ===================Additionally, the code in each section should further be divided into sub-sections that group relevant functionality within the section. The header for a sub-section is as follows.
// === SubSectionName ===At least one section should be defined in every file.
Here is a large-scale example of how sections should be used in source files.
// =================
// === AxisOrder ===
// =================
/// Defines the order in which particular axis coordinates are processed. Used
/// for example to define the rotation order in `DisplayObject`.
pub enum AxisOrder {XYZ,XZY,YXZ,YZX,ZXY,ZYX}
impl Default for AxisOrder {
fn default() -> Self {Self::XYZ}
}
// =================
// === Transform ===
// =================
/// Defines the order in which transformations (scale, rotate, translate) are
/// applied to a particular object.
pub enum TransformOrder {
ScaleRotateTranslate,
ScaleTranslateRotate,
RotateScaleTranslate,
RotateTranslateScale,
TranslateRotateScale,
TranslateScaleRotate
}
impl Default for TransformOrder {
fn default() -> Self { Self::ScaleRotateTranslate }
}
// =============================
// === HierarchicalTransform ===
// =============================
pub struct HierarchicalTransform<OnChange> {
transform : Transform,
transform_matrix : Matrix4<f32>,
origin : Matrix4<f32>,
matrix : Matrix4<f32>,
pub dirty : dirty::SharedBool<OnChange>,
pub logger : Logger,
}
impl<OnChange> HierarchicalTransform<OnChange> {
pub fn new(logger:Logger, on_change:OnChange) -> Self {
let logger_dirty = logger.sub("dirty");
let transform = default();
let transform_matrix = Matrix4::identity();
let origin = Matrix4::identity();
let matrix = Matrix4::identity();
let dirty = dirty::SharedBool::new(logger_dirty,on_change);
Self {transform,transform_matrix,origin,matrix,dirty,logger}
}
}
// === Getters ===
impl<OnChange> HierarchicalTransform<OnChange> {
pub fn position(&self) -> &Vector3<f32> {
&self.transform.position
}
pub fn rotation(&self) -> &Vector3<f32> {
&self.transform.rotation
}
...
}
// === Setters ===
impl<OnChange:Callback0> HierarchicalTransform<OnChange> {
pub fn position_mut(&mut self) -> &mut Vector3<f32> {
self.dirty.set();
&mut self.transform.position
}
pub fn rotation_mut(&mut self) -> &mut Vector3<f32> {
self.dirty.set();
&mut self.transform.rotation
}
...
}We use the following rules for the amount of vertical space separating various constructs in the source:
- 3 blank lines after imports.
- 3 blank lines before each section.
- 2 blank lines before each sub-section.
- 1 blank line after each section / sub-section.
- 1 blank line before functions / structures / impls.
- 1 blank line at the end of the file.
Please note that the spacing 'overlaps', in that if multiple rules, you should take the maximum of the spacings that apply. For example, if you have a section following the imports, you only use three lines of spacing.
In an ideal world, all expressions in the code should be a single line. This is because multi-line expressions are usually hard to read, and because they can introduce lots of noise in the code. In the vast majority of cases, the presence of a multi-line expression indicates that the code needs refactoring.
Please try to refactor portions of multi-line expressions to well-named variables, and divide them up to a set of single-line expressions.
The following is an example of poorly formatted code:
pub fn new() -> Self {
let shape_dirty = ShapeDirty::new(logger.sub("shape_dirty"),
on_dirty.clone());
let dirty_flag = MeshRegistryDirty::new(logger.sub("mesh_registry_dirty"),
on_dirty);
Self { dirty_flag, dirty_flag }
}The following is an example of the same code properly formatted:
pub fn new() -> Self {
let sub_logger = logger.sub("shape_dirty");
let shape_dirty = ShapeDirty::new(sub_logger,on_dirty.clone());
let sub_logger = logger.sub("mesh_registry_dirty");
let dirty_flag = MeshRegistryDirty::new(sub_logger,on_dirty);
Self {shape_dirty,dirty_flag}
}In order to create a visual flow to our code that aids readability, the following constructs should be aligned vertically where possible:
- Assignment operators (
=) - Type operators (
:) - Match arrows (
=>) - Similar parameters or types
The following is an example of a function that correctly uses the vertical alignment rules above:
impl Printer for GlobalVarStorage {
fn print(&self, builder:&mut Builder) {
match self {
Self::ConstStorage => build!(builder,"const"),
Self::UniformStorage => build!(builder,"uniform"),
Self::InStorage (qual) => build!(builder,"in" ,qual),
Self::OutStorage (qual) => build!(builder,"out",qual),
}
}
}The following spacing rules are also employed in order to create a visual flow to our code to aid readability:
- The type operator is spaced:
fn test(foo: String, bar: Int) { ... } - Commas between complex expressions (including the argument list) are spaced
- Commas between simple elements are spaced:
Result<Self, Error> - Arguments to functions are spaced:
build(builder, "out", qual) - Operators are always spaced:
let foo = a + b * c;
The following function definitions are all good examples of correct use of spacing.
pub fn new<Dom:Str>(dom: Dom, logger: Logger) -> Result<Self, Error> {
...
}pub fn new<Dom: Str>(dom: Dom, logger: Logger) -> Result<Self, Error> {
...
}pub fn new<Dom: Str>
(dom: Dom, logger: Logger, on_dirty: OnDirty) -> Result<Self, Error> {
...
}pub fn new<Dom: Str>
(dom: Dom, logger: Logger, on_dirty: OnDirty, on_remove: OnRemove)
-> Result<Self, Error> {
...
}pub fn new<Dom: Str>
( dom : Dom
, logger : Logger
, on_dirty : OnDirty
, on_remove : OnRemove
, on_replace : OnReplace
) -> Result<Self, Error> {
...
}Long where clauses are formatted like this:
pub fn new<D, L>(dom: D, logger: L) -> Result<Self, Error>
where D: AsRef<str>, L: IsLogger {
...
}Or, in case they are really long, like this:
pub fn new<D, L>(dom: D, logger: L) -> Result<Self, Error>
where D: AsRef<str>
L: IsLogger
... {
...
}In order to aid in fast discovery of the header of an impl definition, we use
the following style. In all cases, the where block should be placed after a
line break.
// No constraints
impl<T> Printer for Option<T> {
...
}// Some constraints
impl<T:Printer>
Printer for Option<T> {
...
}// Constraints in where block
impl<T> Printer for Option<T>
where T: Printer {
...
}We also have a specific ordering for impl definitions. It is as follows:
- The "main"
implfor a type, containing its associated behaviour. - Getter implementations, if present.
- Setter implementations, if present.
- Trait implementations for the type, if present.
- The "internal"
implblock for that type, if present.
Each of these should be accompanied by a sub-heading.
We have the following rules for getters and setters in our codebase.
- Getters do not have the
get_prefix, while setters do have theset_prefix. - If a setter is provided, a
mutaccessor should be provided as well as part of the settersimplblock.
Correct examples for the definition of getters and setters can be found below:
fn field(&self) -> &Type {
&self.field
}
fn field_mut(&mut self) -> &mut Type {
&mut self.field
}
fn set_field(&mut self, val:Type) {
*self.field_mut = val;
}Getters and setters should be implemented in separate impl, blocks, each with
their own subheading.
All names should be designed to be used in a qualified fashion. This does, however, make one situation quite tricky. In order to use methods defined inside a trait, that trait has to be in scope.
Consider a trait display::Object. We want to use it in a function definition
like the following fn test<T:display::Object>(t:T) { ... }, and we also want
the ability to use methods defined in the trait (and hence it has to be in
scope). Under these circumstances, clippy warns that display::Object is
being subject to unnecessary qualification, but we don't want to perform the
replacement.
In order to export traits, please rename them using the following convention:
/// Common traits.
pub mod traits {
// Read the Rust Style Guide to learn more about the used naming.
pub use super::Object as TRAIT_Object;
pub use super::ObjectOps as TRAIT_ObjectOps;
}Once we have such a definition, we can import traits into scope using the simple
use display::object::traits::*, which will avoid any warnings about
unnecessary qualification.
Enso has some fairly simple general naming conventions, though the sections below may provide more rules for use in specific cases.
- Types are written using
UpperCamelCase. - Variables and function names are written using
snake_case. - If a name contains an initialism or acronym, all parts of that initialism
should be lower-case:
make_http_request, notmake_HTTP_request. - Short variable names such as
aandbshould only be used in the following contexts:- Where there is no other appropriate name.
- Named lifetimes. They should never be used to refer to temporary data in a function, as all temporaries should be given descriptive names.
- Names should be descriptive, even if this makes them longer.
- Any function that performs an unsafe operation that is not documented in its
type (e.g.
fn head<T>(ts: Vec<T>) -> T, which fails if the list is empty), must be named using the word 'unsafe' (e.g.unsafeHead). For more information on unsafe function usage, see the section on safety. - Naming should use American English spelling.
Enso follows the standard rust convention for structuring crates, as provided by
cargo new. This is discussed more in depth
here.
Whereas Rust defaults to making module members private by default, this is not
the philosophy used by the Enso codebases. We tend to want our codebase to be
flexible for consumers, so we tend to avoid making things private. Instead, we
use the concept of an internal module to separate public from private.
If you are writing code in a module foo.bar.baz and would like to signal that
a particular construct (e.g. a function) is for internal use in that package,
you should create a foo.bar.baz.internal package. You can then write the
relevant language construct in that package instead of the source package.
Given Rust's performance guarantees, making things pub has no impact on the
performance of the compiled code. As a result, the only circumstance under
which things are allowed to not be pub is when doing so would allow consumers
of an API to break internal guarantees provided by that API (e.g. building an
immutable collection on top of a mutable buffer).
All Rust projects are built and managed using cargo.
Comments in code are a tricky area to get right as we have found that comments often expire quickly, and in absence of a way to validate them, remain incorrect for long periods of time. In order to best deal with this problem, we make the keeping of comments up-to-date into an integral part of our programming practice while also limiting the types and kinds of comments we allow.
Comments across the Enso codebases fall into three main types:
- Documentation Comments: API documentation for all appropriate language constructs.
- Source Notes: Detailed explorations of design reasoning that avoid cluttering the code itself.
- Tasks: Things that need doing or fixing in the codebase.
When we write comments, we try to follow one general guideline. A comment should explain what and why, without mentioning how. The how should be self-explanatory from reading the code, and if you find that it is not, that is a sign that the code in question needs refactoring.
Code should be written in such a way that it guides you over what it does, and comments should not be used as a crutch for badly-designed code.
One of the primary forms of comment that we allow across the Enso codebases is the doc comment. We use these comments to document the public API of a module, as defined in The Public API. For constructs that are part of the public API, the following should be documented:
- Top-Level Type Definitions: All top-level type definitions must have a doc comment.
- Functions: Function documentation should provide at-a-glance intuition for how to use that function.
Documentation comments are intended for consumption by the users of the API, and are written using the standard rustdoc syntax. Doc comments should contain:
- Summary: A one-line summary of the construct's behaviour or purpose.
- Description (Optional): Any useful information that would be necessary for a consumer of the API to know (that is not encoded in the types). This should be written in grammatically correct English.
Convention in rust is to not document function or return parameters, and so rustdoc does not provide a way to do so.
An example of a valid set of comments for some rust code is as follows:
/// A representation of tree structures containing elements of type `T`.
pub trait Tree<T> {
/// Provides a sequence representation of the tree.
///
/// The function provides configurable behaviour for the order in which the
/// tree is walked. See [WalkStrategy](org.enso.WalkStrategy.html) for
/// the provided options.
pub fn walk_to_sequence(self: &Self, order: WalkStrategy<T>) -> Vec<T> {
// ...
}
fn getBuffer(self: &Self) -> Vec<T> {
// ...
}
}Documentation comments should not reference internal implementation details, or be used to explain choices made in the implementation. For this kind of info, you should use Source Notes as described below.
You may document more than what is specified here, but this is the minimum required for acceptance at code-review time.
Source Notes is a mechanism for moving detailed design information about a piece of code out of the code itself. In doing so, it retains the key information about the design while not impeding the flow of the code. They are used in the following circumstances:
- Design Information: Documentation about why something was written in a particular fashion, as well as information on the process that led to it being done this way.
- Explaining Complexity: If an implementation uses complex constructs or any elements that are non-obvious, these should be explained as part of a source note.
- Knowledge Provenance: Explaining where some knowledge (e.g. a mathematical formula or an algorithm) was obtained from. It is also useful to accompany these by some commentary on why the choice was made.
- Safety: Any unsafe usage of a function must be accompanied by a source note that explains what makes this particular usage safe.
Source notes are detailed comments that, like all comments, explain both the what and the why of the code being described. In very rare cases, it may include some how, but only to refer to why a particular method was chosen to achieve the goals in question.
A source note comment is broken into two parts:
- Referrer: This is a small comment left at the point where the explanation
is relevant. It takes the following form:
// Note [Note Name], whereNote Nameis a unique identifier across the codebase. These names should be descriptive, and make sure you search for it before using it, in case it is already in use. - Source Note: This is the comment itself, which is a large block comment
placed after the first function in which it is referred to in the module. The
first line names the note using the same referrer as above:
// Note [Note Name]. The name(s) in the note are underlined using a string of the=(equals) character.
A source note may contain sections within it where necessary. These are titled
using the following syntax: == Note [Note Name (Section Name)], and can be
referred to from a referrer much as the main source note can be.
Sometimes it is necessary to reference a source note in another module, but this should never be done in-line. Instead, a piece of code should reference a source note in the same module that references the other note while providing additional context to that reference.
An example can be seen below:
/// A representation of tree structures containing elements of type `T`.
pub trait Tree<T> {
/// Provides a sequence representation of the tree.
///
/// The function provides configurable behaviour for the order in which the
/// tree is walked. See [WalkStrategy](org.enso.WalkStrategy.html) for
/// the provided options.
pub fn walk_to_sequence(self: &Self, order: WalkStrategy<T>) -> Vec<T> {
let mut output_vec = Vec.new(self.getBuffer().len()); // Note [Buffer Size]
// ...
}
// Note [Buffer Size]
// ==================
// When working with the buffer for the tree walk, it is important that you
// ensure....
fn getBuffer(self: &Self) -> Vec<T> {
// ...
}
}We follow a simple convention for TODO comments in our codebases:
- The line starts with
TODOorFIXME. - It is then followed by the author's initials
[ARA], or for multiple people[ARA, MK], in square brackets. - It is then followed by an explanation of what needs to be done.
For example:
// TODO [ARA] This is a bit of a kludge. Instead of X it should to Y, accounting
// for the fact that Z.There are, of course, a few other situations where commenting is very useful:
- Commenting Out: You may comment out code while developing it, but if you commit any commented out code, it should be accompanied by an explanation of why said code can't just be deleted.
- Bugs: You can use comments to indicate bugs in our code, as well as third-party bugs. In both cases, the comment should link to the issue tracker where the bug has been reported.
Any good style guide goes beyond purely stylistic rules, and also talks about design styles to use in code.
While we often have to write complex functionality, we want to ensure that the code itself is kept as simple and easy to read as possible. To do this, please use the following rules:
- Write single-line expressions wherever possible, rather than writing one complex chunk of code.
- Separate intermediate results out to their own variables with appropriate names. Even if they are temporaries, giving them a name is a great aid to code comprehension.
Whereas most languages don't have a concept of safety, rust comes with a built
in notion of unsafe. When working with unsafe functions and code blocks, you
must account for the following:
- As unsafe functions are explicitly declared with the keyword
unsafe, we do not need any special naming convention for them. - Usage of unsafety should be confined to the smallest possible block.
- Usage of unsafety should be accompanied by a source note that explains why it is necessary, and any constraints on its usage.
- Unsafe function usage must be accompanied by a source note explaining how this usage of it is made safe.
Furthermore, we do not allow for code containing pattern matches that can fail.
New code should always be accompanied by tests. These can be unit, integration, or some combination of the two, and they should always aim to test the new code in a rigorous fashion.
- Testing should be performed as described in the Rust book and should use the functionality for testing built into the language.
- Tests should cover as much code as possible, and may be a combination of unit and integration tests.
Any performance-critical code should also be accompanied by a set of benchmarks. These are intended to allow us to catch performance regressions as the code evolves, but also ensure that we have some idea of the code's performance in general.
- We use nightly rust in order to access the built-in benchmarking functionality.
- We measure time, CPU, and memory usage where possible.
- Where relevant, benchmarks may set thresholds which, when surpassed, cause the benchmark to fail. These thresholds should be set for a release build, and not for a development build.
Do not benchmark a development build as the data you get will often be entirely useless.
In general, we aim for a codebase that is free of warnings and lints, and we do this using the following ideas:
New code should introduce no new warnings onto main. You may build with warnings on your own branch, but the code that is submitted as part of a PR should not introduce new warnings. You should also endeavour to fix any warnings that you come across during development.
Sometimes it is impossible to fix a warning (often in situations involving the use of macros). In such cases, you are allowed to suppress the warning locally, but this must be accompanied by a source note explaining why you are doing so.