Description
Proposal
Problem statement
OnceCell
has been a stable API since 1.70.0 with the following methods:
pub fn get(&self) -> Option<&T>
- stale since 1.70.0;pub fn get_mut(&mut self) -> Option<&mut T>
- stable since 1.70.0;pub fn set(&self, value: T) -> Result<(), T>
- stable since 1.70.0;pub fn get_or_init<F>(&self, f: F) -> &T
- stable since 1.70.0;pub fn get_or_try_init<F, E>(&self, f: F) -> Result<&T, E>
- unstable Tracking Issue foronce_cell_try
rust#109737
The problem I encountered at rust-lang/rust#74465 (comment) is that I need to obtain a mut
of OnceCell like get_mut
reference and am unsure if it's initialized. So, a get_mut_or_init
or get_mut_or_try_init
counterpart to the ones without mut
is needed.
Motivating examples or use cases
This proposal is straightforward so the problem is the motivation I want to add new APIs.
Current workaround:
pub fn mut_batches(&mut self) -> IterMut<'_, RecordBatch> {
self.batches.get_or_init(|| load_batches(&self.buf));
// SAFETY - init above
unsafe { self.batches.get_mut().unwrap_unchecked() }.iter_mut()
}
Expected code with get_mut_or_init
:
pub fn mut_batches(&mut self) -> IterMut<'_, RecordBatch> {
self.batches.get_mut_or_init(|| load_batches(&self.buf));
}
Solution sketch
Add these two methods. It should be intuitive and I try it in rust-lang/rust#114788. Since it's an API change, I was guided to create this ACP.
It looks like:
#[inline]
pub fn get_mut_or_init<F>(&mut self, f: F) -> &mut T
where
F: FnOnce() -> T,
{
match self.get_mut_or_try_init(|| Ok::<T, !>(f())) {
Ok(val) => val,
}
}
pub fn get_mut_or_try_init<F, E>(&mut self, f: F) -> Result<&mut T, E>
where
F: FnOnce() -> Result<T, E>,
{
if let Some(val) = self.get() {
return Ok(val);
}
self.try_init(f)?;
Ok(self.get_mut().unwrap())
}
// Avoid inlining the initialization closure into the common path that fetches
// the already initialized value
#[cold]
fn try_init<F, E>(&self, f: F) -> Result<(), E>
where
F: FnOnce() -> Result<T, E>,
{
let val = f()?;
// Note that *some* forms of reentrant initialization might lead to
// UB (see `reentrant_init` test). I believe that just removing this
// `assert`, while keeping `set/get` would be sound, but it seems
// better to panic, rather than to silently use an old value.
assert!(self.set(val).is_ok(), "reentrant init");
Ok(())
}
Alternatives
Not yet. The solution proposed above should be the simplest one.
Links and related work
- Tracking Issue for
once_cell
rust#74465 - Tracking Issue for
once_cell_try
rust#109737 - impl get_mut_or_init and get_mut_or_try_init for OnceCell and OnceLock rust#114788
What happens now?
This issue contains an API change proposal (or ACP) and is part of the libs-api team feature lifecycle. Once this issue is filed, the libs-api team will review open proposals as capability becomes available. Current response times do not have a clear estimate, but may be up to several months.
Possible responses
The libs team may respond in various different ways. First, the team will consider the problem (this doesn't require any concrete solution or alternatives to have been proposed):
- We think this problem seems worth solving, and the standard library might be the right place to solve it.
- We think that this probably doesn't belong in the standard library.
Second, if there's a concrete solution:
- We think this specific solution looks roughly right, approved, you or someone else should implement this. (Further review will still happen on the subsequent implementation PR.)
- We're not sure this is the right solution, and the alternatives or other materials don't give us enough information to be sure about that. Here are some questions we have that aren't answered, or rough ideas about alternatives we'd want to see discussed.