With this new knowledge about iterators, we can improve the I/O project in
Chapter 12 by using iterators to make places in the code clearer and more
concise. Let’s look at how iterators can improve our implementation of the
Config::build function and the search function.
In Listing 12-6, we added code that took a slice of String values and created
an instance of the Config struct by indexing into the slice and cloning the
values, allowing the Config struct to own those values. In Listing 13-17,
we’ve reproduced the implementation of the Config::build function as it was
in Listing 12-23:
At the time, we said not to worry about the inefficient clone calls because
we would remove them in the future. Well, that time is now!
We needed clone here because we have a slice with String elements in the
parameter args, but the build function doesn’t own args. To return
ownership of a Config instance, we had to clone the values from the query
and file_path fields of Config so the Config instance can own its values.
With our new knowledge about iterators, we can change the build function to
take ownership of an iterator as its argument instead of borrowing a slice.
We’ll use the iterator functionality instead of the code that checks the length
of the slice and indexes into specific locations. This will clarify what the
Config::build function is doing because the iterator will access the values.
Once Config::build takes ownership of the iterator and stops using indexing
operations that borrow, we can move the String values from the iterator into
Config rather than calling clone and making a new allocation.
Open your I/O project’s src/main.rs file, which should look like this:
Filename: src/main.rs
use std::env;
use std::process;
use minigrep::Config;
fnmain() {
let args: Vec<String> = env::args().collect();
let config = Config::build(&args).unwrap_or_else(|err| {
eprintln!("Problem parsing arguments: {err}");
process::exit(1);
});
// --snip--ifletErr(e) = minigrep::run(config) {
eprintln!("Application error: {e}");
process::exit(1);
}
}
We’ll first change the start of the main function that we had in Listing
12-24 to the code in Listing 13-18, which this time uses an iterator. This
won’t compile until we update Config::build as well.
The env::args function returns an iterator! Rather than collecting the
iterator values into a vector and then passing a slice to Config::build, now
we’re passing ownership of the iterator returned from env::args to
Config::build directly.
Next, we need to update the definition of Config::build. In your I/O
project’s src/lib.rs file, let’s change the signature of Config::build to
look like Listing 13-19. This still won’t compile because we need to update the
function body.
The standard library documentation for the env::args function shows that the
type of the iterator it returns is std::env::Args, and that type implements
the Iterator trait and returns String values.
We’ve updated the signature of the Config::build function so the parameter
args has a generic type with the trait bounds impl Iterator<Item = String>
instead of &[String]. This usage of the impl Trait syntax we discussed in
the “Traits as Parameters” section of Chapter 10
means that args can be any type that implements the Iterator trait and
returns String items.
Because we’re taking ownership of args and we’ll be mutating args by
iterating over it, we can add the mut keyword into the specification of the
args parameter to make it mutable.
Next, we’ll fix the body of Config::build. Because args implements the
Iterator trait, we know we can call the next method on it! Listing 13-20
updates the code from Listing 12-23 to use the next method:
Remember that the first value in the return value of env::args is the name of
the program. We want to ignore that and get to the next value, so first we call
next and do nothing with the return value. Second, we call next to get the
value we want to put in the query field of Config. If next returns a
Some, we use a match to extract the value. If it returns None, it means
not enough arguments were given and we return early with an Err value. We do
the same thing for the file_path value.
We can also take advantage of iterators in the search function in our I/O
project, which is reproduced here in Listing 13-21 as it was in Listing 12-19:
We can write this code in a more concise way using iterator adapter methods.
Doing so also lets us avoid having a mutable intermediate results vector. The
functional programming style prefers to minimize the amount of mutable state to
make code clearer. Removing the mutable state might enable a future enhancement
to make searching happen in parallel, because we wouldn’t have to manage
concurrent access to the results vector. Listing 13-22 shows this change:
Recall that the purpose of the search function is to return all lines in
contents that contain the query. Similar to the filter example in Listing
13-16, this code uses the filter adapter to keep only the lines that
line.contains(query) returns true for. We then collect the matching lines
into another vector with collect. Much simpler! Feel free to make the same
change to use iterator methods in the search_case_insensitive function as
well.
The next logical question is which style you should choose in your own code and
why: the original implementation in Listing 13-21 or the version using
iterators in Listing 13-22. Most Rust programmers prefer to use the iterator
style. It’s a bit tougher to get the hang of at first, but once you get a feel
for the various iterator adapters and what they do, iterators can be easier to
understand. Instead of fiddling with the various bits of looping and building
new vectors, the code focuses on the high-level objective of the loop. This
abstracts away some of the commonplace code so it’s easier to see the concepts
that are unique to this code, such as the filtering condition each element in
the iterator must pass.
But are the two implementations truly equivalent? The intuitive assumption
might be that the more low-level loop will be faster. Let’s talk about
performance.