As the title not quite subtly hints, today I'm going to write about the traits that come with Rust's standard library, specifically from the context of a library writer yearning to give their users a good experience.

Note that I define built-in as "came with the box that you downloaded Rust in". This includes traits that have no special language semantics.

Rust uses traits for a good number of things, from the quite obvious operator overloading to the very subtle like Send and Sync. Some traits can be auto-derived (which means you can just write #[derive(Copy, Clone, PartialEq, Eq, Debug, Default, Hash, …)] and get a magically appearing implementation that usually does the right thing. with Send and Sync, you actually have to actively opt out of implementing them.

So I'll try to go from the obvious and specific to the nebulous and (perhaps) surprising:

PartialEq defines partial equality. This means the relation is symmetric (a == b → b == a for all a and b of the respective type) and transitive (a == b ∧ b == c → a == c for all a, b and c of the type).

Eq is used as a marker to declare that PartialEq is also reflexive (a == a for all a of the respective type). Counter-Example: The f32 and f64 types implement PartialEq, but not Eq, because NAN != NAN.

It is useful to implement both traits, for a good number of std's types use them as trait bounds for one thing or another, e.g. Vec's dedup() function. Auto-deriving PartialEq will make the eq-method check equality of all parts of your type (e.g. for structs, all parts will be checked, while for enum types, the variant along with all its contents is checked).

Since Eq is basically empty (apart from a pre-defined marker method that is used by the auto-deriving logic to ensure that it actually worked and probably shouldn't be used anywhere else), auto-deriving has no chance of doing something interesting, so it won't.

PartialOrd defines a partial order, and extends the equality of PartialEq by the Ordering relation. Partial in this case means there may be instances of your type that cannot be meaningfully compared.

Ord requires a full order relation. In contrast to PartialEq/Eq, those two traits actually have a different interface (the partial_cmp(…) method returns Option<Ordering>, so it can return None for incomparable instances, while Ord's cmp(…) returns the Ordering directly), and their only relation is that if you wish to implement Ord, you have to implement PartialOrd as well, for the latter is a trait bound for the former.

Auto-deriving both will order structs lexicographically, enums by the appearance of the variant in the definition (unless you define values for the variants).

Should you opt to implement the relation manually, be careful to ensure a stable result that follows the rules of ordering relations, lest your program break in confusing ways.

The order imposed by (Partial)Ord is used for the <, <=, => and > operators.

The following table shows the relation between arithmetic operators and traits:

Apart from Rem, which is an abbreviation for Remainder, also known as mod in some other languages, those are pretty obvious. The binary operator traits all have a RHS (=right-hand-side) generic type bound which defaults to Self, as well as an associated Output type that the implementation has to declare.

This means you can implement e.g. addition of a Foo and a Bar to return a Baz if you so desire. Note that while the operations do not constrain their semantics in any way, it is strongly advisable not to make them mean something entirely different than their arithmetical counterparts shown above, lest your implementation become a footgun for other developers.

Aside: Just before Rust 1.0.0, someone actually implemented Add for String and Vec to mean concatenation. It took yours truly (among others) a heartrending plea to the Rust gods until they mended this particular error at least for Vec. This means that you can write my_string + " etc." as long as my_string is a String – note that this will actually consume my_string by value, which may be confusing to some.

The following operators are defined to be used bitwise. Note that unlike the !-operator, the short-circuiting && and || cannot be overloaded – because this would require them to avoid eagerly evaluating their arguments, which isn't easily possible in Rust – and even if it were possible, e.g. using closures as a workaround, it would just be confusing other developers.

Like with all operators, be wary of implementing those for your type unless you have specific reason to, e.g. it may make sense to define some of them on BitSets (which by the way are no longer part of the standard library as of Rust 1.3.0) or on types representing large integers.

The Index and IndexMut traits specify the indexing operation with immutable and mutable results. The former is read-only, while the latter allows both assigning and mutating the value, that is calling a function that takes a &mut argument (note that this may, but need not be self).

You will most likely want to implement them with any sort of collection classes. Apart from those, use of those traits would be a footgun anyway.

the Fn*-traits abstract the act of calling something. The difference between those traits is simply how the self is taken: Fn takes it by reference, FnMut by mutable reference and FnOnce consumes it by value (which is after all why it can only be called once, as there is no self to call afterwards).

Note that this distinction is just about self, not any of the other arguments. It is perfectly fine to call a Fn with mutably referenced or even owned/moved arguments.

The traits are auto-derived for functions and closures and I have yet to see a different case where they are useful. stebalien also points out that they actually cannot be implemented in stable Rust.

Display and Debug are used for formatting values. The former is meant to produce user-facing output and as such cannot be auto-derived, while the latter will usually produce a JSON-like representation of your type and can safely be auto-derived for most types.

Should you decide to implement Debug manually, you may want to distinguish between the normal {:?} format specifier and the pretty-printing {:#?} one. The easiest way to do this is to use the Debug Builder method. The Formatter type has some (unfortunately unstable as of yet, but soon to be stabilized) very helpful methods, look for debug_struct(&mut self, &str), debug_tuple(&mut self, &str), etc.

Otherwise you can do this by querying the Formatter::flags() method, which will have the 4 bit set (which I found out by experiment). Thus, if (f.flags() & 4) == 4 is true, the caller asked you to produce pretty-printed output. Note that this is expressly not a public part of Debug/Formatter's interface, so the Rust gods could change this the moment I write this.

Seriously, if you can help it, use auto-derived Debug or debug builders.

Aside: It's not very common, but there may be cyclic object graphs in Rust, which would send the debug logic into infinite recursion (well, usually the application will crash with a stack overflow). In most cases, this is acceptable, because cycles are quite uncommon. In case you suspect your type to form cycles more often than average, you may want to do something about it.

Those two traits take care of duplicating objects.

Copy declares that your type can be safely copied. This means that if you copy the memory a value of your type resides in, you get a new valid value that has no references to data of the original. It can be auto-derived (and requires Clone, because all Copyable types are also Cloneable by definition). In fact there is no use in implementing it manually anywhere.

There are exactly three reasons not to implement Copy:

1. Your type cannot be Copyable, because it contains mutable references or implements Drop.
2. Your type is so big that copying it would be prohibitively expensive (e.g. it could contain an [f64; 65536]) Rust Guru eddyb notes that Rust would still copy the whole thing unless you work with references.
3. You actually want move semantics for your type

The third reason should be explained further. By default, Rust has move semantics – if you assign a value from a to b, a no longer holds the value. However, for types that have a Copy implementation, the value is actually copied (unless the original value is no longer used, in which case LLVM may elide the copy to improve performance). The docs for Copy go into more detail.

Clone is a more generic solution that will take care of any references. You will probably want to auto-derive it in most cases (as being able to clone values is rather useful), and only implement it manually for things like custom refcounting schemes, garbage collection or something similar.

In contrast to Copy which actually alters assignment semantics, Clone is explicit: It defines the .clone() method which you have to call manually to clone something.

The Drop trait is about giving back resources when things go out of scope. Much has been written about it, and how you shouldn't rely on it being called should something go wrong. Still, it's very nice especially for wrapping FFI constructs that have to somehow be reclaimed later, also it's used on files, sockets, database handles and the kitchen sink.

Unless you have an instance where this applies, you should refrain from implementing Drop at all – your values will be Dropped correctly by default anyway. A (temporary) exception is to insert some tracing output to find out when a specific value has been dropped.

Default is a trait to declare a default value for your type. It can be auto-derived, but only for structs whose members all have a Default implementations.

It is implemented for a great many types in the standard libraries, and also used in a surprising number of places. So if your type has a value that can be construed as being "default", it is a good idea to implement this trait.

A great thing with structs that have a Default implementation, is you can instantiate them with only the non-default values like:

let x = Foo { bar: baz, ..Default::default() }

and have all other fourtytwo fields of Foo be filled with default values. How cool is that? Honestly, the only single reason not to have Default is if your type has no single value that works as a default.

Error is a base trait for all values representing an error in Rust. For those coming from Java, it is akin to Throwable – and behaves similarly (apart from the fact that we neither catch nor throw them).

It is a very good idea to implement Error for any type you intend to use in the latter part of Result. Doing so will make your functions much more composable, especially when you can simply Box the Error as a trait object.

Look at the Using try! section of the Rust book for further information.

Hashing is the process of reducing a bag of data into a single value that still distinguishes different data items while returning the same value for equal items without requiring as much bits as the processed data.

In Rust, the Hash trait denotes values to which this process can be applied. Note that this trait does not relate any information about the hash algorithm used (this is encapsulated within the Hasher trait), it basically just orders the bits to be hashed.

Aside: This is also the reason why HashMap does not implement Hash itself, because two equal hash maps could still store their contents in different order, resulting in different hashes, which would break the hashing contract. Even if the items were ordered (see Ord above), hashing them would require sorting, which would be too expensive to be useful. One could also xor the entry hash values, but that would require re-using the Hasher, which would at least require a Clone bound, which the interface lacks. In any event, use a BTreeMap as key for your maps if you must have maps as keys to a hashmap. In that case, you should probably also be thinking about a career change.

Unless you have some very specific constraints regarding equality, you can safely auto-derive Hash. Should you choose to implement it manually, be careful not to break its contract, lest your programs fail in surprising and hard to debug ways.

Rust's for loops work can iterate over everything that implements IntoIterator. Yes, that includes Iterator itself. Apart from that, the Iterator trait has a lot of cool methods for working with the iterated values, like filter, map, enumerate, fold, any, all, sum, min and much more.

Did I tell you I love iterators? If your type contains more than one value of something, and it makes sense to do the same thing to all of them, consider providing an Iterator over them just in case. :-)

Implementing Iterator is actually pretty easy – you just need to declare the Item type and write the next(&mut self) -> Option<Self::Item> method. This method should return Some(value) as long as you have values, then return None to stop the iteration.

Note that if you have a slice of values (or an array or vec, from which you can borrow a slice), you can get its iterator directly, so you don't even need to implement it yourself. This may not be as cool as auto-deriving, but it's nice nonetheless.

While writing optional, I found that using a const slice's iterator is faster in the boolean case, but creating a slice of the value is still slower than copying it for most values. Your mileage may vary.

I said it before, whoever designed the From and Into traits is a genius. They abstract over conversions between types (which are used quite often) and allow library authors to make their libraries much more interoperable, e.g. by using Into<T> instead of T as arguments.

For obvious reasons, those traits cannot be auto-derived, but writing them should be trivial in most cases. If you choose to implement them – and you should wherever you find a worthwhile conversion! – implement From wherever possible, and failing that implement Into.

Why? There is a blanket implementation of Into<U> for T where U: From<T>. This means if you have implemented From, you get an Into delivered to your home free of charge.

Why not implement From everywhere? The orphan rule unfortunately forbids implementing From for types not defined in other crates. For example, I have an Optioned<T> type, that I may want to convert into an Option<T>. Trying to implement From:

impl<T: Noned + Copy> From<Optioned<T>> for Option<T> {
    #[inline]
    fn from(self) -> Option<T> { self.map_or_else(|| none(), wrap) }
}

I get an error: type parameter T must be used as the type parameter for some local type (e.g. MyStruct<T>); only traits defined in the current crate can be implemented for a type parameter [E0210]

Note that you can implement From and Into with multiple classes, you can have a From<Foo> and a From<Bar> for the same type.

There are a good number of traits starting with Into – IntoIterator, which is stable and which we already have discussed above, just being one of them. There also is FromIterator, which does the reverse, namely constructing a value of your type from an iterator of items.

Then there is FromStr for any types that can be parsed from a string, which is very useful for types that you want read from any textual source, e.g. configuration or user input. Note that its interface differs from From<&str> in that it returns a Result, and thus allows to relate parsing errors to the caller.

Those all have to do with references and borrowing, so I grouped them into one section.

The prefix-*-operator dereferences a reference, producing the value. This is directly represented by the Deref trait; if we require a mutable value (e.g. to assign somehing or call a mutating function), we invoke the DerefMut trait.

Note that this does not necessarily mean consuming the value – maybe we take a reference to it in the same expression, e.g. &*x (which you will likely find in code that deals with special kinds of pointers, e.g. syntax::ptr::P is widely used in clippy and other lints / compiler plugins. Perhaps as_ref() would be clearer in those cases (see below), but here we are.

The Deref trait has but one method: fn deref(&'a self) -> &'a Self::Target; where Target is an associated type of the trait. The lifetime bound on the result requires that the returned value live as long as self. This requirement restricts the possible implementation strategies to two options:

1. Dereference to a value within your type, e.g. if you have a struct Foo { b: Bar }, you could dereference to Bar. Note that this doesn't mean you should do it, but it's possible and may in some cases be useful. This obviously works as long as the part's lifetime is the one of the whole, which is the default with Rust's lifetime elision.

2. Dereference to a constant 'static value – I do this in optional to have OptionBool dereference to a const Option<bool>. This works because the result is guaranteed to outlive our value, because it is alive for the rest of the program. This is only useful if you have a finite value domain. Even then, it is probably clearer to use Into instead of Deref. I doubt that we will see this too often.

DerefMut only has the former strategy. Its usefulness is limited to implementing special kinds of pointers.

To see why no other implementation can be possible, let's make a thought experiment: If we had a return value that is neither static, nor bound to the lifetime 'a of our dereferenced value, it would by definition have a lifetime 'b that is distinct from 'a. There is no way we could unify those two lifetimes – QED.

As for the other traits, they exist mainly to abstract away the act of borrowing / referencing for some types (because e.g. with Vecs it is possible to borrow a slice of them). As such, they fall into the same category as the From/Into traits – they don't get invoked behind the scenes, but exist to make some interfaces more adaptable.

The relation between Borrow, AsRef/AsMut and ToOwned is as follows:

For an example where this applies, look no further than my earlier detective story about std::borrow::Cow.

Should you decide to implement Borrow and/or BorrowMut, you need to ensure that the result of borrow() has the same hash value as the borrowed original value, lest your program fail in strange and confusing ways.

In fact, unless your type does something interesting with ownership (like Cow or owning_ref), you should probably leave Borrow, BorrowMut and ToOwned alone and use a Cow if you want to abstract over owned/borrowed values.

I have not yet divined in what cases AsRef/AsMut may be useful unless you count the predefined impls that std already provides.

Those two traits testify that the types transfer trouble-free 'tween threads.

You will never need to implement them – in fact Rust will do it for you by default unless you explicitly opt out (or your type contains a non-threadsafe part). You can opt out by saying:

impl !Send for MyType {} // this type cannot be sent to other threads
impl !Sync for MyType {} // nor can it be used by two of them

Note that this is currently not possible in stable Rust (which means that only std gets to pull this trick).

Send says that you can move your type between thread barriers, while Sync allows sharing a value between threads. Let's take a step back and look at what that means, probably best with an example.

Say we have some problem that we intend to solve by calculating some values in parallel (because concurrency is the way, baby!). For that we need some immutable data that will be the same in all threads – we want shared data. This data needs to be Syncable.

Next, we want to give some part of the problem to each thread. To do this, we need to Send it to them. But wait! How do we get the shared data to each thread? Easy: We Send a reference to it – this works because of the following blanket definition in the standard library:

impl<'a, T> Send for &'a T where T: Sync + ?Sized

This means if something can be Synced, you can Send a reference to it between threads. Cool.

For a more thorough treatment, see Manish Goregaokar's How Rust Achieves Thread Safety or the Sync docs.

Thanks go to stebalien and carols10cents for (proof)reading a draft of this and donating their time, effort and awesome comments! This post wouldn't have been half as good without them.

Have I missed, or worse, misunderstood a trait (or a facet of one)? Please write your extension requests on /r/rust or rust-lang users.

Originally published 2015-07-30

License: TBD