1.0.0[][src]Function core::mem::forget

pub fn forget<T>(t: T)

Takes ownership and "forgets" about the value without running its destructor.

Any resources the value manages, such as heap memory or a file handle, will linger forever in an unreachable state. However, it does not guarantee that pointers to this memory will remain valid.

Safety

forget is not marked as unsafe, because Rust's safety guarantees do not include a guarantee that destructors will always run. For example, a program can create a reference cycle using Rc, or call process::exit to exit without running destructors. Thus, allowing mem::forget from safe code does not fundamentally change Rust's safety guarantees.

That said, leaking resources such as memory or I/O objects is usually undesirable. The need comes up in some specialized use cases for FFI or unsafe code, but even then, ManuallyDrop is typically preferred.

Because forgetting a value is allowed, any unsafe code you write must allow for this possibility. You cannot return a value and expect that the caller will necessarily run the value's destructor.

Examples

Leak an I/O object, never closing the file:

use std::mem;
use std::fs::File;

let file = File::open("foo.txt").unwrap();
mem::forget(file);Run

The practical use cases for forget are rather specialized and mainly come up in unsafe or FFI code. However, ManuallyDrop is usually preferred for such cases, e.g.:

use std::mem::ManuallyDrop;

let v = vec![65, 122];
// Before we disassemble `v` into its raw parts, make sure it
// does not get dropped!
let mut v = ManuallyDrop::new(v);
// Now disassemble `v`. These operations cannot panic, so there cannot be a leak.
let ptr = v.as_mut_ptr();
let cap = v.capacity();
// Finally, build a `String`.
let s = unsafe { String::from_raw_parts(ptr, 2, cap) };
assert_eq!(s, "Az");
// `s` is implicitly dropped and its memory deallocated.Run

Using ManuallyDrop here has two advantages: