1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566 567 568 569 570 571 572 573 574 575 576 577 578 579 580 581 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 669 670 671 672 673 674 675 676 677 678 679 680 681 682 683 684 685 686 687 688 689 690 691 692 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 806 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 830 831 832 833 834 835 836 837 838 839 840 841 842 843 844 845 846 847 848 849 850 851 852 853 854 855 856 857 858 859 860 861 862 863 864 865 866 867 868 869 870 871 872 873 874 875 876 877 878 879 880 881 882 883 884 885 886 887 888 889 890 891 892 893 894 895 896 897 898 899 900 901 902 903 904 905 906 907 908 909 910 911 912 913 914 915 916 917 918 919 920 921 922 923 924 925 926 927 928 929 930 931 932 933 934 935 936 937 938 939 940 941 942 943 944 945 946 947 948 949 950 951 952 953 954 955 956 957 958 959 960 961 962 963 964 965 966 967 968 969 970 971 972 973 974 975 976 977 978 979 980 981 982 983 984 985 986 987 988 989 990 991 992 993 994 995 996 997 998 999 1000 1001 1002 1003 1004 1005 1006 1007 1008 1009 1010 1011 1012 1013 1014 1015 1016 1017 1018 1019 1020 1021 1022 1023 1024 1025 1026 1027 1028 1029 1030 1031 1032 1033 1034 1035 1036 1037 1038 1039 1040 1041 1042 1043 1044 1045 1046 1047 1048 1049 1050 1051 1052 1053 1054 1055 1056 1057 1058 1059 1060 1061 1062 1063 1064 1065 1066 1067 1068 1069 1070 1071 1072 1073 1074 1075 1076 1077 1078 1079 1080 1081 1082 1083 1084 1085 1086 1087 1088 1089 1090 1091 1092 1093 1094 1095 1096 1097 1098 1099 1100 1101 1102 1103 1104 1105 1106 1107 1108 1109 1110 1111 1112 1113 1114 1115 1116 1117 1118 1119 1120 1121 1122 1123 1124 1125 1126 1127 1128 1129 1130 1131 1132 1133 1134 1135 1136 1137 1138 1139 1140 1141 1142 1143 1144 1145 1146 1147 1148 1149 1150 1151 1152 1153 1154 1155 1156 1157 1158 1159 1160 1161 1162 1163 1164 1165 1166 1167 1168 1169 1170 1171 1172 1173 1174 1175 1176 1177 1178 1179 1180 1181 1182 1183 1184 1185 1186 1187 1188 1189 1190 1191 1192 1193 1194 1195 1196 1197 1198 1199 1200 1201 1202 1203 1204 1205 1206 1207 1208 1209 1210 1211 1212 1213 1214 1215 1216 1217 1218 1219 1220 1221 1222 1223 1224 1225 1226 1227 1228 1229 1230 1231 1232 1233 1234 1235 1236 1237 1238 1239 1240 1241 1242 1243 1244 1245 1246 1247 1248 1249 1250 1251 1252 1253 1254 1255 1256 1257 1258 1259 1260 1261 1262 1263 1264 1265 1266 1267 1268 1269 1270 1271 1272 1273 1274 1275 1276 1277 1278 1279 1280 1281 1282 1283 1284 1285 1286 1287 1288 1289 1290 1291 1292 1293 1294 1295 1296 1297 1298 1299 1300 1301 1302 1303 1304 1305 1306 1307 1308 1309 1310 1311 1312 1313 1314 1315 1316 1317 1318 1319 1320 1321 1322 1323 1324 1325 1326 1327 1328 1329 1330 1331 1332 1333 1334 1335 1336 1337 1338 1339 1340 1341 1342 1343 1344 1345 1346 1347 1348 1349 1350 1351 1352 1353 1354 1355 1356 1357 1358 1359 1360 1361 1362 1363 1364 1365 1366 1367 1368 1369 1370 1371 1372 1373 1374 1375 1376 1377 1378 1379 1380 1381 1382 1383 1384 1385 1386 1387 1388 1389 1390 1391 1392 1393 1394 1395 1396 1397 1398 1399 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 1416 1417 1418 1419 1420 1421 1422 1423 1424 1425 1426 1427 1428 1429 1430 1431 1432 1433 1434 1435 1436 1437 1438 1439 1440 1441 1442 1443 1444 1445 1446 1447 1448 1449 1450 1451 1452 1453 1454 1455 1456 1457 1458 1459 1460 1461 1462 1463 1464 1465 1466 1467 1468 1469 1470 1471 1472 1473 1474 1475 1476 1477 1478 1479 1480 1481 1482 1483 1484 1485 1486 1487 1488 1489 1490 1491 1492 1493 1494 1495 1496 1497 1498 1499 1500 1501 1502 1503 1504 1505 1506 1507 1508 1509 1510 1511 1512 1513 1514 1515 1516 1517 1518 1519 1520 1521 1522 1523 1524 1525 1526 1527 1528 1529 1530 1531 1532 1533 1534 1535 1536 1537 1538 1539 1540 1541 1542 1543 1544 1545 1546 1547 1548 1549 1550 1551 1552 1553 1554 1555 1556 1557 1558 1559 1560 1561 1562 1563 1564 1565 1566 1567 1568 1569 1570 1571 1572 1573 1574 1575 1576 1577 1578 1579 1580 1581 1582 1583 1584 1585 1586 1587 1588 1589 1590 1591 1592 1593 1594 1595 1596 1597 1598 1599 1600 1601 1602 1603 1604 1605 1606 1607 1608 1609 1610 1611 1612 1613 1614 1615 1616 1617 1618 1619 1620 1621 1622 1623 1624 1625 1626 1627 1628 1629 1630 1631 1632 1633 1634 1635 1636 1637 1638 1639 1640 1641 1642 1643 1644 1645 1646 1647 1648 1649 1650 1651 1652 1653 1654 1655 1656 1657 1658 1659 1660 1661 1662 1663 1664 1665 1666 1667 1668 1669 1670 1671 1672 1673 1674 1675 1676 1677 1678 1679 1680 1681 1682 1683 1684 1685 1686 1687 1688 1689 1690 1691 1692 1693 1694 1695 1696 1697 1698 1699 1700 1701 1702 1703 1704 1705 1706 1707 1708 1709 1710 1711 1712 1713 1714 1715 1716 1717 1718 1719 1720 1721 1722 1723 1724 1725 1726 1727 1728 1729 1730 1731 1732 1733 1734 1735 1736 1737 1738 1739 1740 1741 1742 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1751 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1758 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1768 1769 1770 1771 1772 1773 1774 1775 1776 1777 1778 1779 1780 1781 1782 1783 1784 1785 1786 1787 1788 1789 1790 1791 1792 1793 1794 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 1806 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1813 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1823 1824 1825 1826 1827 1828 1829 1830 1831 1832 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 1923 1924 1925 1926 1927 1928 1929 1930 1931 1932 1933 1934 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 1940 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 1954 1955 1956 1957 1958 1959 1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965
//! Types that pin data to a location in memory.
//!
//! It is sometimes useful to be able to rely upon a certain value not being able to *move*,
//! in the sense that its address in memory cannot change. This is useful especially when there
//! are one or more [*pointers*][pointer] pointing at that value. The ability to rely on this
//! guarantee that the value a [pointer] is pointing at (its **pointee**) will
//!
//! 1. Not be *moved* out of its memory location
//! 2. More generally, remain *valid* at that same memory location
//!
//! is called "pinning." We would say that a value which satisfies these guarantees has been
//! "pinned," in that it has been permanently (until the end of its lifespan) attached to its
//! location in memory, as though pinned to a pinboard. Pinning a value is an incredibly useful
//! building block for [`unsafe`] code to be able to reason about whether a raw pointer to the
//! pinned value is still valid. [As we'll see later][drop-guarantee], this is necessarily from the
//! time the value is first pinned until the end of its lifespan. This concept of "pinning" is
//! necessary to implement safe interfaces on top of things like self-referential types and
//! intrusive data structures which cannot currently be modeled in fully safe Rust using only
//! borrow-checked [references][reference].
//!
//! "Pinning" allows us to put a *value* which exists at some location in memory into a state where
//! safe code cannot *move* that value to a different location in memory or otherwise invalidate it
//! at its current location (unless it implements [`Unpin`], which we will
//! [talk about below][self#unpin]). Anything that wants to interact with the pinned value in a way
//! that has the potential to violate these guarantees must promise that it will not actually
//! violate them, using the [`unsafe`] keyword to mark that such a promise is upheld by the user
//! and not the compiler. In this way, we can allow other [`unsafe`] code to rely on any pointers
//! that point to the pinned value to be valid to dereference while it is pinned.
//!
//! Note that as long as you don't use [`unsafe`], it's impossible to create or misuse a pinned
//! value in a way that is unsound. See the documentation of [`Pin<Ptr>`] for more
//! information on the practicalities of how to pin a value and how to use that pinned value from a
//! user's perspective without using [`unsafe`].
//!
//! The rest of this documentation is intended to be the source of truth for users of [`Pin<Ptr>`]
//! that are implementing the [`unsafe`] pieces of an interface that relies on pinning for validity;
//! users of [`Pin<Ptr>`] in safe code do not need to read it in detail.
//!
//! There are several sections to this documentation:
//!
//! * [What is "*moving*"?][what-is-moving]
//! * [What is "pinning"?][what-is-pinning]
//! * [Address sensitivity, AKA "when do we need pinning?"][address-sensitive-values]
//! * [Examples of types with address-sensitive states][address-sensitive-examples]
//! * [Self-referential struct][self-ref]
//! * [Intrusive, doubly-linked list][linked-list]
//! * [Subtle details and the `Drop` guarantee][subtle-details]
//!
//! # What is "*moving*"?
//! [what-is-moving]: self#what-is-moving
//!
//! When we say a value is *moved*, we mean that the compiler copies, byte-for-byte, the
//! value from one location to another. In a purely mechanical sense, this is identical to
//! [`Copy`]ing a value from one place in memory to another. In Rust, "move" carries with it the
//! semantics of ownership transfer from one variable to another, which is the key difference
//! between a [`Copy`] and a move. For the purposes of this module's documentation, however, when
//! we write *move* in italics, we mean *specifically* that the value has *moved* in the mechanical
//! sense of being located at a new place in memory.
//!
//! All values in Rust are trivially *moveable*. This means that the address at which a value is
//! located is not necessarily stable in between borrows. The compiler is allowed to *move* a value
//! to a new address without running any code to notify that value that its address
//! has changed. Although the compiler will not insert memory *moves* where no semantic move has
//! occurred, there are many places where a value *may* be moved. For example, when doing
//! assignment or passing a value into a function.
//!
//! ```
//! #[derive(Default)]
//! struct AddrTracker(Option<usize>);
//!
//! impl AddrTracker {
//! // If we haven't checked the addr of self yet, store the current
//! // address. If we have, confirm that the current address is the same
//! // as it was last time, or else panic.
//! fn check_for_move(&mut self) {
//! let current_addr = self as *mut Self as usize;
//! match self.0 {
//! None => self.0 = Some(current_addr),
//! Some(prev_addr) => assert_eq!(prev_addr, current_addr),
//! }
//! }
//! }
//!
//! // Create a tracker and store the initial address
//! let mut tracker = AddrTracker::default();
//! tracker.check_for_move();
//!
//! // Here we shadow the variable. This carries a semantic move, and may therefore also
//! // come with a mechanical memory *move*
//! let mut tracker = tracker;
//!
//! // May panic!
//! // tracker.check_for_move();
//! ```
//!
//! In this sense, Rust does not guarantee that `check_for_move()` will never panic, because the
//! compiler is permitted to *move* `tracker` in many situations.
//!
//! Common smart-pointer types such as [`Box<T>`] and [`&mut T`] also allow *moving* the underlying
//! *value* they point at: you can move out of a [`Box<T>`], or you can use [`mem::replace`] to
//! move a `T` out of a [`&mut T`]. Therefore, putting a value (such as `tracker` above) behind a
//! pointer isn't enough on its own to ensure that its address does not change.
//!
//! # What is "pinning"?
//! [what-is-pinning]: self#what-is-pinning
//!
//! We say that a value has been *pinned* when it has been put into a state where it is guaranteed
//! to remain *located at the same place in memory* from the time it is pinned until its
//! [`drop`] is called.
//!
//! ## Address-sensitive values, AKA "when we need pinning"
//! [address-sensitive-values]: self#address-sensitive-values-aka-when-we-need-pinning
//!
//! Most values in Rust are entirely okay with being *moved* around at-will.
//! Types for which it is *always* the case that *any* value of that type can be
//! *moved* at-will should implement [`Unpin`], which we will discuss more [below][self#unpin].
//!
//! [`Pin`] is specifically targeted at allowing the implementation of *safe interfaces* around
//! types which have some state during which they become "address-sensitive." A value in such an
//! "address-sensitive" state is *not* okay with being *moved* around at-will. Such a value must
//! stay *un-moved* and valid during the address-sensitive portion of its lifespan because some
//! interface is relying on those invariants to be true in order for its implementation to be sound.
//!
//! As a motivating example of a type which may become address-sensitive, consider a type which
//! contains a pointer to another piece of its own data, *i.e.* a "self-referential" type. In order
//! for such a type to be implemented soundly, the pointer which points into `self`'s data must be
//! proven valid whenever it is accessed. But if that value is *moved*, the pointer will still
//! point to the old address where the value was located and not into the new location of `self`,
//! thus becoming invalid. A key example of such self-referential types are the state machines
//! generated by the compiler to implement [`Future`] for `async fn`s.
//!
//! Such types that have an *address-sensitive* state usually follow a lifecycle
//! that looks something like so:
//!
//! 1. A value is created which can be freely moved around.
//! * e.g. calling an async function which returns a state machine implementing [`Future`]
//! 2. An operation causes the value to depend on its own address not changing
//! * e.g. calling [`poll`] for the first time on the produced [`Future`]
//! 3. Further pieces of the safe interface of the type use internal [`unsafe`] operations which
//! assume that the address of the value is stable
//! * e.g. subsequent calls to [`poll`]
//! 4. Before the value is invalidated (e.g. deallocated), it is *dropped*, giving it a chance to
//! notify anything with pointers to itself that those pointers will be invalidated
//! * e.g. [`drop`]ping the [`Future`] [^pin-drop-future]
//!
//! There are two possible ways to ensure the invariants required for 2. and 3. above (which
//! apply to any address-sensitive type, not just self-referential types) do not get broken.
//!
//! 1. Have the value detect when it is moved and update all the pointers that point to itself.
//! 2. Guarantee that the address of the value does not change (and that memory is not re-used
//! for anything else) during the time that the pointers to it are expected to be valid to
//! dereference.
//!
//! Since, as we discussed, Rust can move values without notifying them that they have moved, the
//! first option is ruled out.
//!
//! In order to implement the second option, we must in some way enforce its key invariant,
//! *i.e.* prevent the value from being *moved* or otherwise invalidated (you may notice this
//! sounds an awful lot like the definition of *pinning* a value). There a few ways one might be
//! able to enforce this invariant in Rust:
//!
//! 1. Offer a wholly `unsafe` API to interact with the object, thus requiring every caller to
//! uphold the invariant themselves
//! 2. Store the value that must not be moved behind a carefully managed pointer internal to
//! the object
//! 3. Leverage the type system to encode and enforce this invariant by presenting a restricted
//! API surface to interact with *any* object that requires these invariants
//!
//! The first option is quite obviously undesirable, as the [`unsafe`]ty of the interface will
//! become viral throughout all code that interacts with the object.
//!
//! The second option is a viable solution to the problem for some use cases, in particular
//! for self-referential types. Under this model, any type that has an address sensitive state
//! would ultimately store its data in something like a [`Box<T>`], carefully manage internal
//! access to that data to ensure no *moves* or other invalidation occurs, and finally
//! provide a safe interface on top.
//!
//! There are a couple of linked disadvantages to using this model. The most significant is that
//! each individual object must assume it is *on its own* to ensure
//! that its data does not become *moved* or otherwise invalidated. Since there is no shared
//! contract between values of different types, an object cannot assume that others interacting
//! with it will properly respect the invariants around interacting with its data and must
//! therefore protect it from everyone. Because of this, *composition* of address-sensitive types
//! requires at least a level of pointer indirection each time a new object is added to the mix
//! (and, practically, a heap allocation).
//!
//! Although there were other reasons as well, this issue of expensive composition is the key thing
//! that drove Rust towards adopting a different model. It is particularly a problem
//! when one considers, for example, the implications of composing together the [`Future`]s which
//! will eventually make up an asynchronous task (including address-sensitive `async fn` state
//! machines). It is plausible that there could be many layers of [`Future`]s composed together,
//! including multiple layers of `async fn`s handling different parts of a task. It was deemed
//! unacceptable to force indirection and allocation for each layer of composition in this case.
//!
//! [`Pin<Ptr>`] is an implementation of the third option. It allows us to solve the issues
//! discussed with the second option by building a *shared contractual language* around the
//! guarantees of "pinning" data.
//!
//! [^pin-drop-future]: Futures themselves do not ever need to notify other bits of code that
//! they are being dropped, however data structures like stack-based intrusive linked lists do.
//!
//! ## Using [`Pin<Ptr>`] to pin values
//!
//! In order to pin a value, we wrap a *pointer to that value* (of some type `Ptr`) in a
//! [`Pin<Ptr>`]. [`Pin<Ptr>`] can wrap any pointer type, forming a promise that the **pointee**
//! will not be *moved* or [otherwise invalidated][subtle-details].
//!
//! We call such a [`Pin`]-wrapped pointer a **pinning pointer,** (or pinning reference, or pinning
//! `Box`, etc.) because its existence is the thing that is conceptually pinning the underlying
//! pointee in place: it is the metaphorical "pin" securing the data in place on the pinboard
//! (in memory).
//!
//! Notice that the thing wrapped by [`Pin`] is not the value which we want to pin itself, but
//! rather a pointer to that value! A [`Pin<Ptr>`] does not pin the `Ptr`; instead, it pins the
//! pointer's ***pointee** value*.
//!
//! ### Pinning as a library contract
//!
//! Pinning does not require nor make use of any compiler "magic"[^noalias], only a specific
//! contract between the [`unsafe`] parts of a library API and its users.
//!
//! It is important to stress this point as a user of the [`unsafe`] parts of the [`Pin`] API.
//! Practically, this means that performing the mechanics of "pinning" a value by creating a
//! [`Pin<Ptr>`] to it *does not* actually change the way the compiler behaves towards the
//! inner value! It is possible to use incorrect [`unsafe`] code to create a [`Pin<Ptr>`] to a
//! value which does not actually satisfy the invariants that a pinned value must satisfy, and in
//! this way lead to undefined behavior even in (from that point) fully safe code. Similarly, using
//! [`unsafe`], one may get access to a bare [`&mut T`] from a [`Pin<Ptr>`] and
//! use that to invalidly *move* the pinned value out. It is the job of the user of the
//! [`unsafe`] parts of the [`Pin`] API to ensure these invariants are not violated.
//!
//! This differs from e.g. [`UnsafeCell`] which changes the semantics of a program's compiled
//! output. A [`Pin<Ptr>`] is a handle to a value which we have promised we will not move out of,
//! but Rust still considers all values themselves to be fundamentally moveable through, *e.g.*
//! assignment or [`mem::replace`].
//!
//! [^noalias]: There is a bit of nuance here that is still being decided about what the aliasing
//! semantics of `Pin<&mut T>` should be, but this is true as of today.
//!
//! ### How [`Pin`] prevents misuse in safe code
//!
//! In order to accomplish the goal of pinning the pointee value, [`Pin<Ptr>`] restricts access to
//! the wrapped `Ptr` type in safe code. Specifically, [`Pin`] disallows the ability to access
//! the wrapped pointer in ways that would allow the user to *move* the underlying pointee value or
//! otherwise re-use that memory for something else without using [`unsafe`]. For example, a
//! [`Pin<&mut T>`] makes it impossible to obtain the wrapped <code>[&mut] T</code> safely because
//! through that <code>[&mut] T</code> it would be possible to *move* the underlying value out of
//! the pointer with [`mem::replace`], etc.
//!
//! As discussed above, this promise must be upheld manually by [`unsafe`] code which interacts
//! with the [`Pin<Ptr>`] so that other [`unsafe`] code can rely on the pointee value being
//! *un-moved* and valid. Interfaces that operate on values which are in an address-sensitive state
//! accept an argument like <code>[Pin]<[&mut] T></code> or <code>[Pin]<[Box]\<T>></code> to
//! indicate this contract to the caller.
//!
//! [As discussed below][drop-guarantee], opting in to using pinning guarantees in the interface
//! of an address-sensitive type has consequences for the implementation of some safe traits on
//! that type as well.
//!
//! ## Interaction between [`Deref`] and [`Pin<Ptr>`]
//!
//! Since [`Pin<Ptr>`] can wrap any pointer type, it uses [`Deref`] and [`DerefMut`] in
//! order to identify the type of the pinned pointee data and provide (restricted) access to it.
//!
//! A [`Pin<Ptr>`] where [`Ptr: Deref`][Deref] is a "`Ptr`-style pinning pointer" to a pinned
//! [`Ptr::Target`][Target] – so, a <code>[Pin]<[Box]\<T>></code> is an owned, pinning pointer to a
//! pinned `T`, and a <code>[Pin]<[Rc]\<T>></code> is a reference-counted, pinning pointer to a
//! pinned `T`.
//!
//! [`Pin<Ptr>`] also uses the [`<Ptr as Deref>::Target`][Target] type information to modify the
//! interface it is allowed to provide for interacting with that data (for example, when a
//! pinning pointer points at pinned data which implements [`Unpin`], as
//! [discussed below][self#unpin]).
//!
//! [`Pin<Ptr>`] requires that implementations of [`Deref`] and [`DerefMut`] on `Ptr` return a
//! pointer to the pinned data directly and do not *move* out of the `self` parameter during their
//! implementation of [`DerefMut::deref_mut`]. It is unsound for [`unsafe`] code to wrap pointer
//! types with such "malicious" implementations of [`Deref`]; see [`Pin<Ptr>::new_unchecked`] for
//! details.
//!
//! ## Fixing `AddrTracker`
//!
//! The guarantee of a stable address is necessary to make our `AddrTracker` example work. When
//! `check_for_move` sees a <code>[Pin]<&mut AddrTracker></code>, it can safely assume that value
//! will exist at that same address until said value goes out of scope, and thus multiple calls
//! to it *cannot* panic.
//!
//! ```
//! use std::marker::PhantomPinned;
//! use std::pin::Pin;
//! use std::pin::pin;
//!
//! #[derive(Default)]
//! struct AddrTracker {
//! prev_addr: Option<usize>,
//! // remove auto-implemented `Unpin` bound to mark this type as having some
//! // address-sensitive state. This is essential for our expected pinning
//! // guarantees to work, and is discussed more below.
//! _pin: PhantomPinned,
//! }
//!
//! impl AddrTracker {
//! fn check_for_move(self: Pin<&mut Self>) {
//! let current_addr = &*self as *const Self as usize;
//! match self.prev_addr {
//! None => {
//! // SAFETY: we do not move out of self
//! let self_data_mut = unsafe { self.get_unchecked_mut() };
//! self_data_mut.prev_addr = Some(current_addr);
//! },
//! Some(prev_addr) => assert_eq!(prev_addr, current_addr),
//! }
//! }
//! }
//!
//! // 1. Create the value, not yet in an address-sensitive state
//! let tracker = AddrTracker::default();
//!
//! // 2. Pin the value by putting it behind a pinning pointer, thus putting
//! // it into an address-sensitive state
//! let mut ptr_to_pinned_tracker: Pin<&mut AddrTracker> = pin!(tracker);
//! ptr_to_pinned_tracker.as_mut().check_for_move();
//!
//! // Trying to access `tracker` or pass `ptr_to_pinned_tracker` to anything that requires
//! // mutable access to a non-pinned version of it will no longer compile
//!
//! // 3. We can now assume that the tracker value will never be moved, thus
//! // this will never panic!
//! ptr_to_pinned_tracker.as_mut().check_for_move();
//! ```
//!
//! Note that this invariant is enforced by simply making it impossible to call code that would
//! perform a move on the pinned value. This is the case since the only way to access that pinned
//! value is through the pinning <code>[Pin]<[&mut] T>></code>, which in turn restricts our access.
//!
//! ## [`Unpin`]
//!
//! The vast majority of Rust types have no address-sensitive states. These types
//! implement the [`Unpin`] auto-trait, which cancels the restrictive effects of
//! [`Pin`] when the *pointee* type `T` is [`Unpin`]. When [`T: Unpin`][Unpin],
//! <code>[Pin]<[Box]\<T>></code> functions identically to a non-pinning [`Box<T>`]; similarly,
//! <code>[Pin]<[&mut] T></code> would impose no additional restrictions above a regular
//! [`&mut T`].
//!
//! The idea of this trait is to alleviate the reduced ergonomics of APIs that require the use
//! of [`Pin`] for soundness for some types, but which also want to be used by other types that
//! don't care about pinning. The prime example of such an API is [`Future::poll`]. There are many
//! [`Future`] types that don't care about pinning. These futures can implement [`Unpin`] and
//! therefore get around the pinning related restrictions in the API, while still allowing the
//! subset of [`Future`]s which *do* require pinning to be implemented soundly.
//!
//! Note that the interaction between a [`Pin<Ptr>`] and [`Unpin`] is through the type of the
//! **pointee** value, [`<Ptr as Deref>::Target`][Target]. Whether the `Ptr` type itself
//! implements [`Unpin`] does not affect the behavior of a [`Pin<Ptr>`]. For example, whether or not
//! [`Box`] is [`Unpin`] has no effect on the behavior of <code>[Pin]<[Box]\<T>></code>, because
//! `T` is the type of the pointee value, not [`Box`]. So, whether `T` implements [`Unpin`] is
//! the thing that will affect the behavior of the <code>[Pin]<[Box]\<T>></code>.
//!
//! Builtin types that are [`Unpin`] include all of the primitive types, like [`bool`], [`i32`],
//! and [`f32`], references (<code>[&]T</code> and <code>[&mut] T</code>), etc., as well as many
//! core and standard library types like [`Box<T>`], [`String`], and more.
//! These types are marked [`Unpin`] because they do not have an address-sensitive state like the
//! ones we discussed above. If they did have such a state, those parts of their interface would be
//! unsound without being expressed through pinning, and they would then need to not
//! implement [`Unpin`].
//!
//! The compiler is free to take the conservative stance of marking types as [`Unpin`] so long as
//! all of the types that compose its fields are also [`Unpin`]. This is because if a type
//! implements [`Unpin`], then it is unsound for that type's implementation to rely on
//! pinning-related guarantees for soundness, *even* when viewed through a "pinning" pointer! It is
//! the responsibility of the implementor of a type that relies upon pinning for soundness to
//! ensure that type is *not* marked as [`Unpin`] by adding [`PhantomPinned`] field. This is
//! exactly what we did with our `AddrTracker` example above. Without doing this, you *must not*
//! rely on pinning-related guarantees to apply to your type!
//!
//! If need to truly pin a value of a foreign or built-in type that implements [`Unpin`], you'll
//! need to create your own wrapper type around the [`Unpin`] type you want to pin and then
//! opts-out of [`Unpin`] using [`PhantomPinned`].
//!
//! Exposing access to the inner field which you want to remain pinned must then be carefully
//! considered as well! Remember, exposing a method that gives access to a
//! <code>[Pin]<[&mut] InnerT>></code> where <code>InnerT: [Unpin]</code> would allow safe code to
//! trivially move the inner value out of that pinning pointer, which is precisely what you're
//! seeking to prevent! Exposing a field of a pinned value through a pinning pointer is called
//! "projecting" a pin, and the more general case of deciding in which cases a pin should be able
//! to be projected or not is called "structural pinning." We will go into more detail about this
//! [below][structural-pinning].
//!
//! # Examples of address-sensitive types
//! [address-sensitive-examples]: #examples-of-address-sensitive-types
//!
//! ## A self-referential struct
//! [self-ref]: #a-self-referential-struct
//! [`Unmovable`]: #a-self-referential-struct
//!
//! Self-referential structs are the simplest kind of address-sensitive type.
//!
//! It is often useful for a struct to hold a pointer back into itself, which
//! allows the program to efficiently track subsections of the struct.
//! Below, the `slice` field is a pointer into the `data` field, which
//! we could imagine being used to track a sliding window of `data` in parser
//! code.
//!
//! As mentioned before, this pattern is also used extensively by compiler-generated
//! [`Future`]s.
//!
//! ```rust
//! use std::pin::Pin;
//! use std::marker::PhantomPinned;
//! use std::ptr::NonNull;
//!
//! /// This is a self-referential struct because `self.slice` points into `self.data`.
//! struct Unmovable {
//! /// Backing buffer.
//! data: [u8; 64],
//! /// Points at `self.data` which we know is itself non-null. Raw pointer because we can't do
//! /// this with a normal reference.
//! slice: NonNull<[u8]>,
//! /// Suppress `Unpin` so that this cannot be moved out of a `Pin` once constructed.
//! _pin: PhantomPinned,
//! }
//!
//! impl Unmovable {
//! /// Create a new `Unmovable`.
//! ///
//! /// To ensure the data doesn't move we place it on the heap behind a pinning Box.
//! /// Note that the data is pinned, but the `Pin<Box<Self>>` which is pinning it can
//! /// itself still be moved. This is important because it means we can return the pinning
//! /// pointer from the function, which is itself a kind of move!
//! fn new() -> Pin<Box<Self>> {
//! let res = Unmovable {
//! data: [0; 64],
//! // We only create the pointer once the data is in place
//! // otherwise it will have already moved before we even started.
//! slice: NonNull::from(&[]),
//! _pin: PhantomPinned,
//! };
//! // First we put the data in a box, which will be its final resting place
//! let mut boxed = Box::new(res);
//!
//! // Then we make the slice field point to the proper part of that boxed data.
//! // From now on we need to make sure we don't move the boxed data.
//! boxed.slice = NonNull::from(&boxed.data);
//!
//! // To do that, we pin the data in place by pointing to it with a pinning
//! // (`Pin`-wrapped) pointer.
//! //
//! // `Box::into_pin` makes existing `Box` pin the data in-place without moving it,
//! // so we can safely do this now *after* inserting the slice pointer above, but we have
//! // to take care that we haven't performed any other semantic moves of `res` in between.
//! let pin = Box::into_pin(boxed);
//!
//! // Now we can return the pinned (through a pinning Box) data
//! pin
//! }
//! }
//!
//! let unmovable: Pin<Box<Unmovable>> = Unmovable::new();
//!
//! // The inner pointee `Unmovable` struct will now never be allowed to move.
//! // Meanwhile, we are free to move the pointer around.
//! # #[allow(unused_mut)]
//! let mut still_unmoved = unmovable;
//! assert_eq!(still_unmoved.slice, NonNull::from(&still_unmoved.data));
//!
//! // We cannot mutably dereference a `Pin<Ptr>` unless the pointee is `Unpin` or we use unsafe.
//! // Since our type doesn't implement `Unpin`, this will fail to compile.
//! // let mut new_unmoved = Unmovable::new();
//! // std::mem::swap(&mut *still_unmoved, &mut *new_unmoved);
//! ```
//!
//! ## An intrusive, doubly-linked list
//! [linked-list]: #an-intrusive-doubly-linked-list
//!
//! In an intrusive doubly-linked list, the collection itself does not own the memory in which
//! each of its elements is stored. Instead, each client is free to allocate space for elements it
//! adds to the list in whichever manner it likes, including on the stack! Elements can live on a
//! stack frame that lives shorter than the collection does provided the elements that live in a
//! given stack frame are removed from the list before going out of scope.
//!
//! To make such an intrusive data structure work, every element stores pointers to its predecessor
//! and successor within its own data, rather than having the list structure itself managing those
//! pointers. It is in this sense that the structure is "intrusive": the details of how an
//! element is stored within the larger structure "intrudes" on the implementation of the element
//! type itself!
//!
//! The full implementation details of such a data structure are outside the scope of this
//! documentation, but we will discuss how [`Pin`] can help to do so.
//!
//! Using such an intrusive pattern, elements may only be added when they are pinned. If we think
//! about the consequences of adding non-pinned values to such a list, this becomes clear:
//!
//! *Moving* or otherwise invalidating an element's data would invalidate the pointers back to it
//! which are stored in the elements ahead and behind it. Thus, in order to soundly dereference
//! the pointers stored to the next and previous elements, we must satisfy the guarantee that
//! nothing has invalidated those pointers (which point to data that we do not own).
//!
//! Moreover, the [`Drop`][Drop] implementation of each element must in some way notify its
//! predecessor and successor elements that it should be removed from the list before it is fully
//! destroyed, otherwise the pointers back to it would again become invalidated.
//!
//! Crucially, this means we have to be able to rely on [`drop`] always being called before an
//! element is invalidated. If an element could be deallocated or otherwise invalidated without
//! calling [`drop`], the pointers to it stored in its neighboring elements would
//! become invalid, which would break the data structure.
//!
//! Therefore, pinning data also comes with [the "`Drop` guarantee"][drop-guarantee].
//!
//! # Subtle details and the `Drop` guarantee
//! [subtle-details]: self#subtle-details-and-the-drop-guarantee
//! [drop-guarantee]: self#subtle-details-and-the-drop-guarantee
//!
//! The purpose of pinning is not *just* to prevent a value from being *moved*, but more
//! generally to be able to rely on the pinned value *remaining valid **at a specific place*** in
//! memory.
//!
//! To do so, pinning a value adds an *additional* invariant that must be upheld in order for use
//! of the pinned data to be valid, on top of the ones that must be upheld for a non-pinned value
//! of the same type to be valid:
//!
//! From the moment a value is pinned by constructing a [`Pin`]ning pointer to it, that value
//! must *remain, **valid***, at that same address in memory, *until its [`drop`] handler is
//! called.*
//!
//! There is some subtlety to this which we have not yet talked about in detail. The invariant
//! described above means that, yes,
//!
//! 1. The value must not be moved out of its location in memory
//!
//! but it also implies that,
//!
//! 2. The memory location that stores the value must not get invalidated or otherwise repurposed
//! during the lifespan of the pinned value until its [`drop`] returns or panics
//!
//! This point is subtle but required for intrusive data structures to be implemented soundly.
//!
//! ## `Drop` guarantee
//!
//! There needs to be a way for a pinned value to notify any code that is relying on its pinned
//! status that it is about to be destroyed. In this way, the dependent code can remove the
//! pinned value's address from its data structures or otherwise change its behavior with the
//! knowledge that it can no longer rely on that value existing at the location it was pinned to.
//!
//! Thus, in any situation where we may want to overwrite a pinned value, that value's [`drop`] must
//! be called beforehand (unless the pinned value implements [`Unpin`], in which case we can ignore
//! all of [`Pin`]'s guarantees, as usual).
//!
//! The most common storage-reuse situations occur when a value on the stack is destroyed as part
//! of a function return and when heap storage is freed. In both cases, [`drop`] gets run for us
//! by Rust when using standard safe code. However, for manual heap allocations or otherwise
//! custom-allocated storage, [`unsafe`] code must make sure to call [`ptr::drop_in_place`] before
//! deallocating and re-using said storage.
//!
//! In addition, storage "re-use"/invalidation can happen even if no storage is (de-)allocated.
//! For example, if we had an [`Option`] which contained a `Some(v)` where `v` is pinned, then `v`
//! would be invalidated by setting that option to `None`.
//!
//! Similarly, if a [`Vec`] was used to store pinned values and [`Vec::set_len`] was used to
//! manually "kill" some elements of a vector, all of the items "killed" would become invalidated,
//! which would be *undefined behavior* if those items were pinned.
//!
//! Both of these cases are somewhat contrived, but it is crucial to remember that [`Pin`]ned data
//! *must* be [`drop`]ped before it is invalidated; not just to prevent memory leaks, but as a
//! matter of soundness. As a corollary, the following code can *never* be made safe:
//!
//! ```rust
//! # use std::mem::ManuallyDrop;
//! # use std::pin::Pin;
//! # struct Type;
//! // Pin something inside a `ManuallyDrop`. This is fine on its own.
//! let mut pin: Pin<Box<ManuallyDrop<Type>>> = Box::pin(ManuallyDrop::new(Type));
//!
//! // However, creating a pinning mutable reference to the type *inside*
//! // the `ManuallyDrop` is not!
//! let inner: Pin<&mut Type> = unsafe {
//! Pin::map_unchecked_mut(pin.as_mut(), |x| &mut **x)
//! };
//! ```
//!
//! Because [`mem::ManuallyDrop`] inhibits the destructor of `Type`, it won't get run when the
//! <code>[Box]<[ManuallyDrop]\<Type>></code> is dropped, thus violating the drop guarantee of the
//! <code>[Pin]<[&mut] Type>></code>.
//!
//! Of course, *leaking* memory in such a way that its underlying storage will never get invalidated
//! or re-used is still fine: [`mem::forget`]ing a [`Box<T>`] prevents its storage from ever getting
//! re-used, so the [`drop`] guarantee is still satisfied.
//!
//! # Implementing an address-sensitive type.
//!
//! This section goes into detail on important considerations for implementing your own
//! address-sensitive types, which are different from merely using [`Pin<Ptr>`] in a generic
//! way.
//!
//! ## Implementing [`Drop`] for types with address-sensitive states
//! [drop-impl]: self#implementing-drop-for-types-with-address-sensitive-states
//!
//! The [`drop`] function takes [`&mut self`], but this is called *even if that `self` has been
//! pinned*! Implementing [`Drop`] for a type with address-sensitive states, because if `self` was
//! indeed in an address-sensitive state before [`drop`] was called, it is as if the compiler
//! automatically called [`Pin::get_unchecked_mut`].
//!
//! This can never cause a problem in purely safe code because creating a pinning pointer to
//! a type which has an address-sensitive (thus does not implement `Unpin`) requires `unsafe`,
//! but it is important to note that choosing to take advantage of pinning-related guarantees
//! to justify validity in the implementation of your type has consequences for that type's
//! [`Drop`][Drop] implementation as well: if an element of your type could have been pinned,
//! you must treat [`Drop`][Drop] as implicitly taking <code>self: [Pin]<[&mut] Self></code>.
//!
//! You should implement [`Drop`] as follows:
//!
//! ```rust,no_run
//! # use std::pin::Pin;
//! # struct Type;
//! impl Drop for Type {
//! fn drop(&mut self) {
//! // `new_unchecked` is okay because we know this value is never used
//! // again after being dropped.
//! inner_drop(unsafe { Pin::new_unchecked(self)});
//! fn inner_drop(this: Pin<&mut Type>) {
//! // Actual drop code goes here.
//! }
//! }
//! }
//! ```
//!
//! The function `inner_drop` has the signature that [`drop`] *should* have in this situation.
//! This makes sure that you do not accidentally use `self`/`this` in a way that is in conflict
//! with pinning's invariants.
//!
//! Moreover, if your type is [`#[repr(packed)]`][packed], the compiler will automatically
//! move fields around to be able to drop them. It might even do
//! that for fields that happen to be sufficiently aligned. As a consequence, you cannot use
//! pinning with a [`#[repr(packed)]`][packed] type.
//!
//! ### Implementing [`Drop`] for pointer types which will be used as [`Pin`]ning pointers
//!
//! It should further be noted that creating a pinning pointer of some type `Ptr` *also* carries
//! with it implications on the way that `Ptr` type must implement [`Drop`]
//! (as well as [`Deref`] and [`DerefMut`])! When implementing a pointer type that may be used as
//! a pinning pointer, you must also take the same care described above not to *move* out of or
//! otherwise invalidate the pointee during [`Drop`], [`Deref`], or [`DerefMut`]
//! implementations.
//!
//! ## "Assigning" pinned data
//!
//! Although in general it is not valid to swap data or assign through a [`Pin<Ptr>`] for the same
//! reason that reusing a pinned object's memory is invalid, it is possible to do validly when
//! implemented with special care for the needs of the exact data structure which is being
//! modified. For example, the assigning function must know how to update all uses of the pinned
//! address (and any other invariants necessary to satisfy validity for that type). For
//! [`Unmovable`] (from the example above), we could write an assignment function like so:
//!
//! ```
//! # use std::pin::Pin;
//! # use std::marker::PhantomPinned;
//! # use std::ptr::NonNull;
//! # struct Unmovable {
//! # data: [u8; 64],
//! # slice: NonNull<[u8]>,
//! # _pin: PhantomPinned,
//! # }
//! #
//! impl Unmovable {
//! // Copies the contents of `src` into `self`, fixing up the self-pointer
//! // in the process.
//! fn assign(self: Pin<&mut Self>, src: Pin<&mut Self>) {
//! unsafe {
//! let unpinned_self = Pin::into_inner_unchecked(self);
//! let unpinned_src = Pin::into_inner_unchecked(src);
//! *unpinned_self = Self {
//! data: unpinned_src.data,
//! slice: NonNull::from(&mut []),
//! _pin: PhantomPinned,
//! };
//!
//! let data_ptr = unpinned_src.data.as_ptr() as *const u8;
//! let slice_ptr = unpinned_src.slice.as_ptr() as *const u8;
//! let offset = slice_ptr.offset_from(data_ptr) as usize;
//! let len = (*unpinned_src.slice.as_ptr()).len();
//!
//! unpinned_self.slice = NonNull::from(&mut unpinned_self.data[offset..offset+len]);
//! }
//! }
//! }
//! ```
//!
//! Even though we can't have the compiler do the assignment for us, it's possible to write
//! such specialized functions for types that might need it.
//!
//! Note that it _is_ possible to assign generically through a [`Pin<Ptr>`] by way of [`Pin::set()`].
//! This does not violate any guarantees, since it will run [`drop`] on the pointee value before
//! assigning the new value. Thus, the [`drop`] implementation still has a chance to perform the
//! necessary notifications to dependent values before the memory location of the original pinned
//! value is overwritten.
//!
//! ## Projections and Structural Pinning
//! [structural-pinning]: self#projections-and-structural-pinning
//!
//! With ordinary structs, it is natural that we want to add *projection* methods that allow
//! borrowing one or more of the inner fields of a struct when the caller has access to a
//! borrow of the whole struct:
//!
//! ```
//! # struct Field;
//! struct Struct {
//! field: Field,
//! // ...
//! }
//!
//! impl Struct {
//! fn field(&mut self) -> &mut Field { &mut self.field }
//! }
//! ```
//!
//! When working with address-sensitive types, it's not obvious what the signature of these
//! functions should be. If `field` takes <code>self: [Pin]<[&mut Struct][&mut]></code>, should it
//! return [`&mut Field`] or <code>[Pin]<[`&mut Field`]></code>? This question also arises with
//! `enum`s and wrapper types like [`Vec<T>`], [`Box<T>`], and [`RefCell<T>`]. (This question
//! applies just as well to shared references, but we'll examine the more common case of mutable
//! references for illustration)
//!
//! It turns out that it's up to the author of `Struct` to decide which type the "projection"
//! should produce. The choice must be *consistent* though: if a pin is projected to a field
//! in one place, then it should very likely not be exposed elsewhere without projecting the
//! pin.
//!
//! As the author of a data structure, you get to decide for each field whether pinning
//! "propagates" to this field or not. Pinning that propagates is also called "structural",
//! because it follows the structure of the type.
//!
//! This choice depends on what guarantees you need from the field for your [`unsafe`] code to work.
//! If the field is itself address-sensitive, or participates in the parent struct's address
//! sensitivity, it will need to be structurally pinned.
//!
//! A useful test is if [`unsafe`] code that consumes <code>[Pin]\<[&mut Struct][&mut]></code>
//! also needs to take note of the address of the field itself, it may be evidence that that field
//! is structurally pinned. Unfortunately, there are no hard-and-fast rules.
//!
//! ### Choosing pinning *not to be* structural for `field`...
//!
//! While counter-intuitive, it's often the easier choice: if you do not expose a
//! <code>[Pin]<[&mut] Field></code>, you do not need to be careful about other code
//! moving out of that field, you just have to ensure is that you never create pinning
//! reference to that field. This does of course also mean that if you decide a field does not
//! have structural pinning, you must not write [`unsafe`] code that assumes (invalidly) that the
//! field *is* structurally pinned!
//!
//! Fields without structural pinning may have a projection method that turns
//! <code>[Pin]<[&mut] Struct></code> into [`&mut Field`]:
//!
//! ```rust,no_run
//! # use std::pin::Pin;
//! # type Field = i32;
//! # struct Struct { field: Field }
//! impl Struct {
//! fn field(self: Pin<&mut Self>) -> &mut Field {
//! // This is okay because `field` is never considered pinned, therefore we do not
//! // need to uphold any pinning guarantees for this field in particular. Of course,
//! // we must not elsewhere assume this field *is* pinned if we choose to expose
//! // such a method!
//! unsafe { &mut self.get_unchecked_mut().field }
//! }
//! }
//! ```
//!
//! You may also in this situation <code>impl [Unpin] for Struct {}</code> *even if* the type of
//! `field` is not [`Unpin`]. Since we have explicitly chosen not to care about pinning guarantees
//! for `field`, the way `field`'s type interacts with pinning is no longer relevant in the
//! context of its use in `Struct`.
//!
//! ### Choosing pinning *to be* structural for `field`...
//!
//! The other option is to decide that pinning is "structural" for `field`,
//! meaning that if the struct is pinned then so is the field.
//!
//! This allows writing a projection that creates a <code>[Pin]<[`&mut Field`]></code>, thus
//! witnessing that the field is pinned:
//!
//! ```rust,no_run
//! # use std::pin::Pin;
//! # type Field = i32;
//! # struct Struct { field: Field }
//! impl Struct {
//! fn field(self: Pin<&mut Self>) -> Pin<&mut Field> {
//! // This is okay because `field` is pinned when `self` is.
//! unsafe { self.map_unchecked_mut(|s| &mut s.field) }
//! }
//! }
//! ```
//!
//! Structural pinning comes with a few extra requirements:
//!
//! 1. *Structural [`Unpin`].* A struct can be [`Unpin`] only if all of its
//! structurally-pinned fields are, too. This is [`Unpin`]'s behavior by default.
//! However, as a libray author, it is your responsibility not to write something like
//! <code>impl\<T> [Unpin] for Struct\<T> {}</code> and then offer a method that provides
//! structural pinning to an inner field of `T`, which may not be [`Unpin`]! (Adding *any*
//! projection operation requires unsafe code, so the fact that [`Unpin`] is a safe trait does
//! not break the principle that you only have to worry about any of this if you use
//! [`unsafe`])
//!
//! 2. *Pinned Destruction.* As discussed [above][drop-impl], [`drop`] takes
//! [`&mut self`], but the struct (and hence its fields) might have been pinned
//! before. The destructor must be written as if its argument was
//! <code>self: [Pin]\<[`&mut Self`]></code>, instead.
//!
//! As a consequence, the struct *must not* be [`#[repr(packed)]`][packed].
//!
//! 3. *Structural Notice of Destruction.* You must uphold the
//! [`Drop` guarantee][drop-guarantee]: once your struct is pinned, the struct's storage cannot
//! be re-used without calling the structurally-pinned fields' destructors, as well.
//!
//! This can be tricky, as witnessed by [`VecDeque<T>`]: the destructor of [`VecDeque<T>`]
//! can fail to call [`drop`] on all elements if one of the destructors panics. This violates
//! the [`Drop` guarantee][drop-guarantee], because it can lead to elements being deallocated
//! without their destructor being called.
//!
//! [`VecDeque<T>`] has no pinning projections, so its destructor is sound. If it wanted
//! to provide such structural pinning, its destructor would need to abort the process if any
//! of the destructors panicked.
//!
//! 4. You must not offer any other operations that could lead to data being *moved* out of
//! the structural fields when your type is pinned. For example, if the struct contains an
//! [`Option<T>`] and there is a [`take`][Option::take]-like operation with type
//! <code>fn([Pin]<[&mut Struct\<T>][&mut]>) -> [`Option<T>`]</code>,
//! then that operation can be used to move a `T` out of a pinned `Struct<T>` – which
//! means pinning cannot be structural for the field holding this data.
//!
//! For a more complex example of moving data out of a pinned type,
//! imagine if [`RefCell<T>`] had a method
//! <code>fn get_pin_mut(self: [Pin]<[`&mut Self`]>) -> [Pin]<[`&mut T`]></code>.
//! Then we could do the following:
//! ```compile_fail
//! # use std::cell::RefCell;
//! # use std::pin::Pin;
//! fn exploit_ref_cell<T>(rc: Pin<&mut RefCell<T>>) {
//! // Here we get pinned access to the `T`.
//! let _: Pin<&mut T> = rc.as_mut().get_pin_mut();
//!
//! // And here we have `&mut T` to the same data.
//! let shared: &RefCell<T> = rc.into_ref().get_ref();
//! let borrow = shared.borrow_mut();
//! let content = &mut *borrow;
//! }
//! ```
//! This is catastrophic: it means we can first pin the content of the
//! [`RefCell<T>`] (using <code>[RefCell]::get_pin_mut</code>) and then move that
//! content using the mutable reference we got later.
//!
//! ### Structural Pinning examples
//!
//! For a type like [`Vec<T>`], both possibilities (structural pinning or not) make
//! sense. A [`Vec<T>`] with structural pinning could have `get_pin`/`get_pin_mut`
//! methods to get pinning references to elements. However, it could *not* allow calling
//! [`pop`][Vec::pop] on a pinned [`Vec<T>`] because that would move the (structurally
//! pinned) contents! Nor could it allow [`push`][Vec::push], which might reallocate and thus also
//! move the contents.
//!
//! A [`Vec<T>`] without structural pinning could
//! <code>impl\<T> [Unpin] for [`Vec<T>`]</code>, because the contents are never pinned
//! and the [`Vec<T>`] itself is fine with being moved as well.
//! At that point pinning just has no effect on the vector at all.
//!
//! In the standard library, pointer types generally do not have structural pinning,
//! and thus they do not offer pinning projections. This is why <code>[`Box<T>`]: [Unpin]</code>
//! holds for all `T`. It makes sense to do this for pointer types, because moving the
//! [`Box<T>`] does not actually move the `T`: the [`Box<T>`] can be freely
//! movable (aka [`Unpin`]) even if the `T` is not. In fact, even <code>[Pin]<[`Box<T>`]></code> and
//! <code>[Pin]<[`&mut T`]></code> are always [`Unpin`] themselves, for the same reason:
//! their contents (the `T`) are pinned, but the pointers themselves can be moved without moving
//! the pinned data. For both [`Box<T>`] and <code>[Pin]<[`Box<T>`]></code>,
//! whether the content is pinned is entirely independent of whether the
//! pointer is pinned, meaning pinning is *not* structural.
//!
//! When implementing a [`Future`] combinator, you will usually need structural pinning
//! for the nested futures, as you need to get pinning ([`Pin`]-wrapped) references to them to
//! call [`poll`]. But if your combinator contains any other data that does not need to be pinned,
//! you can make those fields not structural and hence freely access them with a
//! mutable reference even when you just have <code>[Pin]<[`&mut Self`]></code>
//! (such as in your own [`poll`] implementation).
//!
//! [`&mut T`]: &mut
//! [`&mut self`]: &mut
//! [`&mut Self`]: &mut
//! [`&mut Field`]: &mut
//! [Deref]: crate::ops::Deref "ops::Deref"
//! [`Deref`]: crate::ops::Deref "ops::Deref"
//! [Target]: crate::ops::Deref::Target "ops::Deref::Target"
//! [`DerefMut`]: crate::ops::DerefMut "ops::DerefMut"
//! [`mem::swap`]: crate::mem::swap "mem::swap"
//! [`mem::forget`]: crate::mem::forget "mem::forget"
//! [ManuallyDrop]: crate::mem::ManuallyDrop "ManuallyDrop"
//! [RefCell]: crate::cell::RefCell "cell::RefCell"
//! [`drop`]: Drop::drop
//! [`ptr::write`]: crate::ptr::write "ptr::write"
//! [`Future`]: crate::future::Future "future::Future"
//! [drop-impl]: #drop-implementation
//! [drop-guarantee]: #drop-guarantee
//! [`poll`]: crate::future::Future::poll "future::Future::poll"
//! [&]: reference "shared reference"
//! [&mut]: reference "mutable reference"
//! [`unsafe`]: ../../std/keyword.unsafe.html "keyword unsafe"
//! [packed]: https://doc.rust-lang.org/nomicon/other-reprs.html#reprpacked
//! [`std::alloc`]: ../../std/alloc/index.html
//! [`Box<T>`]: ../../std/boxed/struct.Box.html
//! [Box]: ../../std/boxed/struct.Box.html "Box"
//! [`Box`]: ../../std/boxed/struct.Box.html "Box"
//! [`Rc<T>`]: ../../std/rc/struct.Rc.html
//! [Rc]: ../../std/rc/struct.Rc.html "rc::Rc"
//! [`Vec<T>`]: ../../std/vec/struct.Vec.html
//! [Vec]: ../../std/vec/struct.Vec.html "Vec"
//! [`Vec`]: ../../std/vec/struct.Vec.html "Vec"
//! [`Vec::set_len`]: ../../std/vec/struct.Vec.html#method.set_len "Vec::set_len"
//! [Vec::pop]: ../../std/vec/struct.Vec.html#method.pop "Vec::pop"
//! [Vec::push]: ../../std/vec/struct.Vec.html#method.push "Vec::push"
//! [`Vec::set_len`]: ../../std/vec/struct.Vec.html#method.set_len
//! [`VecDeque<T>`]: ../../std/collections/struct.VecDeque.html
//! [VecDeque]: ../../std/collections/struct.VecDeque.html "collections::VecDeque"
//! [`String`]: ../../std/string/struct.String.html "String"
#![stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
use crate::cmp;
use crate::fmt;
use crate::hash::{Hash, Hasher};
use crate::ops::{CoerceUnsized, Deref, DerefMut, DerefPure, DispatchFromDyn, Receiver};
#[allow(unused_imports)]
use crate::{
cell::{RefCell, UnsafeCell},
future::Future,
marker::PhantomPinned,
mem, ptr,
};
/// A pointer which pins its pointee in place.
///
/// [`Pin`] is a wrapper around some kind of pointer `Ptr` which makes that pointer "pin" its
/// pointee value in place, thus preventing the value referenced by that pointer from being moved
/// or otherwise invalidated at that place in memory unless it implements [`Unpin`].
///
/// *See the [`pin` module] documentation for a more thorough exploration of pinning.*
///
/// ## Pinning values with [`Pin<Ptr>`]
///
/// In order to pin a value, we wrap a *pointer to that value* (of some type `Ptr`) in a
/// [`Pin<Ptr>`]. [`Pin<Ptr>`] can wrap any pointer type, forming a promise that the **pointee**
/// will not be *moved* or [otherwise invalidated][subtle-details]. If the pointee value's type
/// implements [`Unpin`], we are free to disregard these requirements entirely and can wrap any
/// pointer to that value in [`Pin`] directly via [`Pin::new`]. If the pointee value's type does
/// not implement [`Unpin`], then Rust will not let us use the [`Pin::new`] function directly and
/// we'll need to construct a [`Pin`]-wrapped pointer in one of the more specialized manners
/// discussed below.
///
/// We call such a [`Pin`]-wrapped pointer a **pinning pointer** (or pinning ref, or pinning
/// [`Box`], etc.) because its existence is the thing that is pinning the underlying pointee in
/// place: it is the metaphorical "pin" securing the data in place on the pinboard (in memory).
///
/// It is important to stress that the thing in the [`Pin`] is not the value which we want to pin
/// itself, but rather a pointer to that value! A [`Pin<Ptr>`] does not pin the `Ptr` but rather
/// the pointer's ***pointee** value*.
///
/// The most common set of types which require pinning related guarantees for soundness are the
/// compiler-generated state machines that implement [`Future`] for the return value of
/// `async fn`s. These compiler-generated [`Future`]s may contain self-referential pointers, one
/// of the most common use cases for [`Pin`]. More details on this point are provided in the
/// [`pin` module] docs, but suffice it to say they require the guarantees provided by pinning to
/// be implemented soundly.
///
/// This requirement for the implementation of `async fn`s means that the [`Future`] trait
/// requires all calls to [`poll`] to use a <code>self: [Pin]\<&mut Self></code> parameter instead
/// of the usual `&mut self`. Therefore, when manually polling a future, you will need to pin it
/// first.
///
/// You may notice that `async fn`-sourced [`Future`]s are only a small percentage of all
/// [`Future`]s that exist, yet we had to modify the signature of [`poll`] for all [`Future`]s
/// to accommodate them. This is unfortunate, but there is a way that the language attempts to
/// alleviate the extra friction that this API choice incurs: the [`Unpin`] trait.
///
/// The vast majority of Rust types have no reason to ever care about being pinned. These
/// types implement the [`Unpin`] trait, which entirely opts all values of that type out of
/// pinning-related guarantees. For values of these types, pinning a value by pointing to it with a
/// [`Pin<Ptr>`] will have no actual effect.
///
/// The reason this distinction exists is exactly to allow APIs like [`Future::poll`] to take a
/// [`Pin<Ptr>`] as an argument for all types while only forcing [`Future`] types that actually
/// care about pinning guarantees pay the ergonomics cost. For the majority of [`Future`] types
/// that don't have a reason to care about being pinned and therefore implement [`Unpin`], the
/// <code>[Pin]\<&mut Self></code> will act exactly like a regular `&mut Self`, allowing direct
/// access to the underlying value. Only types that *don't* implement [`Unpin`] will be restricted.
///
/// ### Pinning a value of a type that implements [`Unpin`]
///
/// If the type of the value you need to "pin" implements [`Unpin`], you can trivially wrap any
/// pointer to that value in a [`Pin`] by calling [`Pin::new`].
///
/// ```
/// use std::pin::Pin;
///
/// // Create a value of a type that implements `Unpin`
/// let mut unpin_future = std::future::ready(5);
///
/// // Pin it by creating a pinning mutable reference to it (ready to be `poll`ed!)
/// let my_pinned_unpin_future: Pin<&mut _> = Pin::new(&mut unpin_future);
/// ```
///
/// ### Pinning a value inside a [`Box`]
///
/// The simplest and most flexible way to pin a value that does not implement [`Unpin`] is to put
/// that value inside a [`Box`] and then turn that [`Box`] into a "pinning [`Box`]" by wrapping it
/// in a [`Pin`]. You can do both of these in a single step using [`Box::pin`]. Let's see an
/// example of using this flow to pin a [`Future`] returned from calling an `async fn`, a common
/// use case as described above.
///
/// ```
/// use std::pin::Pin;
///
/// async fn add_one(x: u32) -> u32 {
/// x + 1
/// }
///
/// // Call the async function to get a future back
/// let fut = add_one(42);
///
/// // Pin the future inside a pinning box
/// let pinned_fut: Pin<Box<_>> = Box::pin(fut);
/// ```
///
/// If you have a value which is already boxed, for example a [`Box<dyn Future>`][Box], you can pin
/// that value in-place at its current memory address using [`Box::into_pin`].
///
/// ```
/// use std::pin::Pin;
/// use std::future::Future;
///
/// async fn add_one(x: u32) -> u32 {
/// x + 1
/// }
///
/// fn boxed_add_one(x: u32) -> Box<dyn Future<Output = u32>> {
/// Box::new(add_one(x))
/// }
///
/// let boxed_fut = boxed_add_one(42);
///
/// // Pin the future inside the existing box
/// let pinned_fut: Pin<Box<_>> = Box::into_pin(boxed_fut);
/// ```
///
/// There are similar pinning methods offered on the other standard library smart pointer types
/// as well, like [`Rc`] and [`Arc`].
///
/// ### Pinning a value on the stack using [`pin!`]
///
/// There are some situations where it is desirable or even required (for example, in a `#[no_std]`
/// context where you don't have access to the standard library or allocation in general) to
/// pin a value which does not implement [`Unpin`] to its location on the stack. Doing so is
/// possible using the [`pin!`] macro. See its documentation for more.
///
/// ## Layout and ABI
///
/// [`Pin<Ptr>`] is guaranteed to have the same memory layout and ABI[^noalias] as `Ptr`.
///
/// [^noalias]: There is a bit of nuance here that is still being decided about whether the
/// aliasing semantics of `Pin<&mut T>` should be different than `&mut T`, but this is true as of
/// today.
///
/// [`pin!`]: crate::pin::pin "pin!"
/// [`Future`]: crate::future::Future "Future"
/// [`poll`]: crate::future::Future::poll "Future::poll"
/// [`Future::poll`]: crate::future::Future::poll "Future::poll"
/// [`pin` module]: self "pin module"
/// [`Rc`]: ../../std/rc/struct.Rc.html "Rc"
/// [`Arc`]: ../../std/sync/struct.Arc.html "Arc"
/// [Box]: ../../std/boxed/struct.Box.html "Box"
/// [`Box`]: ../../std/boxed/struct.Box.html "Box"
/// [`Box::pin`]: ../../std/boxed/struct.Box.html#method.pin "Box::pin"
/// [`Box::into_pin`]: ../../std/boxed/struct.Box.html#method.into_pin "Box::into_pin"
/// [subtle-details]: self#subtle-details-and-the-drop-guarantee "pin subtle details"
/// [`unsafe`]: ../../std/keyword.unsafe.html "keyword unsafe"
//
// Note: the `Clone` derive below causes unsoundness as it's possible to implement
// `Clone` for mutable references.
// See <https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/unsoundness-in-pin/11311> for more details.
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
#[lang = "pin"]
#[fundamental]
#[repr(transparent)]
#[derive(Copy, Clone)]
pub struct Pin<Ptr> {
// FIXME(#93176): this field is made `#[unstable] #[doc(hidden)] pub` to:
// - deter downstream users from accessing it (which would be unsound!),
// - let the `pin!` macro access it (such a macro requires using struct
// literal syntax in order to benefit from lifetime extension).
//
// However, if the `Deref` impl exposes a field with the same name as this
// field, then the two will collide, resulting in a confusing error when the
// user attempts to access the field through a `Pin<Ptr>`. Therefore, the
// name `__pointer` is designed to be unlikely to collide with any other
// field. Long-term, macro hygiene is expected to offer a more robust
// alternative, alongside `unsafe` fields.
#[unstable(feature = "unsafe_pin_internals", issue = "none")]
#[doc(hidden)]
pub __pointer: Ptr,
}
// The following implementations aren't derived in order to avoid soundness
// issues. `&self.__pointer` should not be accessible to untrusted trait
// implementations.
//
// See <https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/unsoundness-in-pin/11311/73> for more details.
#[stable(feature = "pin_trait_impls", since = "1.41.0")]
impl<Ptr: Deref, Q: Deref> PartialEq<Pin<Q>> for Pin<Ptr>
where
Ptr::Target: PartialEq<Q::Target>,
{
fn eq(&self, other: &Pin<Q>) -> bool {
Ptr::Target::eq(self, other)
}
fn ne(&self, other: &Pin<Q>) -> bool {
Ptr::Target::ne(self, other)
}
}
#[stable(feature = "pin_trait_impls", since = "1.41.0")]
impl<Ptr: Deref<Target: Eq>> Eq for Pin<Ptr> {}
#[stable(feature = "pin_trait_impls", since = "1.41.0")]
impl<Ptr: Deref, Q: Deref> PartialOrd<Pin<Q>> for Pin<Ptr>
where
Ptr::Target: PartialOrd<Q::Target>,
{
fn partial_cmp(&self, other: &Pin<Q>) -> Option<cmp::Ordering> {
Ptr::Target::partial_cmp(self, other)
}
fn lt(&self, other: &Pin<Q>) -> bool {
Ptr::Target::lt(self, other)
}
fn le(&self, other: &Pin<Q>) -> bool {
Ptr::Target::le(self, other)
}
fn gt(&self, other: &Pin<Q>) -> bool {
Ptr::Target::gt(self, other)
}
fn ge(&self, other: &Pin<Q>) -> bool {
Ptr::Target::ge(self, other)
}
}
#[stable(feature = "pin_trait_impls", since = "1.41.0")]
impl<Ptr: Deref<Target: Ord>> Ord for Pin<Ptr> {
fn cmp(&self, other: &Self) -> cmp::Ordering {
Ptr::Target::cmp(self, other)
}
}
#[stable(feature = "pin_trait_impls", since = "1.41.0")]
impl<Ptr: Deref<Target: Hash>> Hash for Pin<Ptr> {
fn hash<H: Hasher>(&self, state: &mut H) {
Ptr::Target::hash(self, state);
}
}
impl<Ptr: Deref<Target: Unpin>> Pin<Ptr> {
/// Construct a new `Pin<Ptr>` around a pointer to some data of a type that
/// implements [`Unpin`].
///
/// Unlike `Pin::new_unchecked`, this method is safe because the pointer
/// `Ptr` dereferences to an [`Unpin`] type, which cancels the pinning guarantees.
///
/// # Examples
///
/// ```
/// use std::pin::Pin;
///
/// let mut val: u8 = 5;
///
/// // Since `val` doesn't care about being moved, we can safely create a "facade" `Pin`
/// // which will allow `val` to participate in `Pin`-bound apis without checking that
/// // pinning guarantees are actually upheld.
/// let mut pinned: Pin<&mut u8> = Pin::new(&mut val);
/// ```
#[inline(always)]
#[rustc_const_unstable(feature = "const_pin", issue = "76654")]
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
pub const fn new(pointer: Ptr) -> Pin<Ptr> {
// SAFETY: the value pointed to is `Unpin`, and so has no requirements
// around pinning.
unsafe { Pin::new_unchecked(pointer) }
}
/// Unwraps this `Pin<Ptr>`, returning the underlying pointer.
///
/// Doing this operation safely requires that the data pointed at by this pinning pointer
/// implements [`Unpin`] so that we can ignore the pinning invariants when unwrapping it.
///
/// # Examples
///
/// ```
/// use std::pin::Pin;
///
/// let mut val: u8 = 5;
/// let pinned: Pin<&mut u8> = Pin::new(&mut val);
///
/// // Unwrap the pin to get the underlying mutable reference to the value. We can do
/// // this because `val` doesn't care about being moved, so the `Pin` was just
/// // a "facade" anyway.
/// let r = Pin::into_inner(pinned);
/// assert_eq!(*r, 5);
/// ```
#[inline(always)]
#[rustc_const_unstable(feature = "const_pin", issue = "76654")]
#[stable(feature = "pin_into_inner", since = "1.39.0")]
pub const fn into_inner(pin: Pin<Ptr>) -> Ptr {
pin.__pointer
}
}
impl<Ptr: Deref> Pin<Ptr> {
/// Construct a new `Pin<Ptr>` around a reference to some data of a type that
/// may or may not implement [`Unpin`].
///
/// If `pointer` dereferences to an [`Unpin`] type, [`Pin::new`] should be used
/// instead.
///
/// # Safety
///
/// This constructor is unsafe because we cannot guarantee that the data
/// pointed to by `pointer` is pinned. At its core, pinning a value means making the
/// guarantee that the value's data will not be moved nor have its storage invalidated until
/// it gets dropped. For a more thorough explanation of pinning, see the [`pin` module docs].
///
/// If the caller that is constructing this `Pin<Ptr>` does not ensure that the data `Ptr`
/// points to is pinned, that is a violation of the API contract and may lead to undefined
/// behavior in later (even safe) operations.
///
/// By using this method, you are also making a promise about the [`Deref`] and
/// [`DerefMut`] implementations of `Ptr`, if they exist. Most importantly, they
/// must not move out of their `self` arguments: `Pin::as_mut` and `Pin::as_ref`
/// will call `DerefMut::deref_mut` and `Deref::deref` *on the pointer type `Ptr`*
/// and expect these methods to uphold the pinning invariants.
/// Moreover, by calling this method you promise that the reference `Ptr`
/// dereferences to will not be moved out of again; in particular, it
/// must not be possible to obtain a `&mut Ptr::Target` and then
/// move out of that reference (using, for example [`mem::swap`]).
///
/// For example, calling `Pin::new_unchecked` on an `&'a mut T` is unsafe because
/// while you are able to pin it for the given lifetime `'a`, you have no control
/// over whether it is kept pinned once `'a` ends, and therefore cannot uphold the
/// guarantee that a value, once pinned, remains pinned until it is dropped:
///
/// ```
/// use std::mem;
/// use std::pin::Pin;
///
/// fn move_pinned_ref<T>(mut a: T, mut b: T) {
/// unsafe {
/// let p: Pin<&mut T> = Pin::new_unchecked(&mut a);
/// // This should mean the pointee `a` can never move again.
/// }
/// mem::swap(&mut a, &mut b); // Potential UB down the road ⚠️
/// // The address of `a` changed to `b`'s stack slot, so `a` got moved even
/// // though we have previously pinned it! We have violated the pinning API contract.
/// }
/// ```
/// A value, once pinned, must remain pinned until it is dropped (unless its type implements
/// `Unpin`). Because `Pin<&mut T>` does not own the value, dropping the `Pin` will not drop
/// the value and will not end the pinning contract. So moving the value after dropping the
/// `Pin<&mut T>` is still a violation of the API contract.
///
/// Similarly, calling `Pin::new_unchecked` on an `Rc<T>` is unsafe because there could be
/// aliases to the same data that are not subject to the pinning restrictions:
/// ```
/// use std::rc::Rc;
/// use std::pin::Pin;
///
/// fn move_pinned_rc<T>(mut x: Rc<T>) {
/// // This should mean the pointee can never move again.
/// let pin = unsafe { Pin::new_unchecked(Rc::clone(&x)) };
/// {
/// let p: Pin<&T> = pin.as_ref();
/// // ...
/// }
/// drop(pin);
///
/// let content = Rc::get_mut(&mut x).unwrap(); // Potential UB down the road ⚠️
/// // Now, if `x` was the only reference, we have a mutable reference to
/// // data that we pinned above, which we could use to move it as we have
/// // seen in the previous example. We have violated the pinning API contract.
/// }
/// ```
///
/// ## Pinning of closure captures
///
/// Particular care is required when using `Pin::new_unchecked` in a closure:
/// `Pin::new_unchecked(&mut var)` where `var` is a by-value (moved) closure capture
/// implicitly makes the promise that the closure itself is pinned, and that *all* uses
/// of this closure capture respect that pinning.
/// ```
/// use std::pin::Pin;
/// use std::task::Context;
/// use std::future::Future;
///
/// fn move_pinned_closure(mut x: impl Future, cx: &mut Context<'_>) {
/// // Create a closure that moves `x`, and then internally uses it in a pinned way.
/// let mut closure = move || unsafe {
/// let _ignore = Pin::new_unchecked(&mut x).poll(cx);
/// };
/// // Call the closure, so the future can assume it has been pinned.
/// closure();
/// // Move the closure somewhere else. This also moves `x`!
/// let mut moved = closure;
/// // Calling it again means we polled the future from two different locations,
/// // violating the pinning API contract.
/// moved(); // Potential UB ⚠️
/// }
/// ```
/// When passing a closure to another API, it might be moving the closure any time, so
/// `Pin::new_unchecked` on closure captures may only be used if the API explicitly documents
/// that the closure is pinned.
///
/// The better alternative is to avoid all that trouble and do the pinning in the outer function
/// instead (here using the [`pin!`][crate::pin::pin] macro):
/// ```
/// use std::pin::pin;
/// use std::task::Context;
/// use std::future::Future;
///
/// fn move_pinned_closure(mut x: impl Future, cx: &mut Context<'_>) {
/// let mut x = pin!(x);
/// // Create a closure that captures `x: Pin<&mut _>`, which is safe to move.
/// let mut closure = move || {
/// let _ignore = x.as_mut().poll(cx);
/// };
/// // Call the closure, so the future can assume it has been pinned.
/// closure();
/// // Move the closure somewhere else.
/// let mut moved = closure;
/// // Calling it again here is fine (except that we might be polling a future that already
/// // returned `Poll::Ready`, but that is a separate problem).
/// moved();
/// }
/// ```
///
/// [`mem::swap`]: crate::mem::swap
/// [`pin` module docs]: self
#[lang = "new_unchecked"]
#[inline(always)]
#[rustc_const_unstable(feature = "const_pin", issue = "76654")]
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
pub const unsafe fn new_unchecked(pointer: Ptr) -> Pin<Ptr> {
Pin { __pointer: pointer }
}
/// Gets a shared reference to the pinned value this [`Pin`] points to.
///
/// This is a generic method to go from `&Pin<Pointer<T>>` to `Pin<&T>`.
/// It is safe because, as part of the contract of `Pin::new_unchecked`,
/// the pointee cannot move after `Pin<Pointer<T>>` got created.
/// "Malicious" implementations of `Pointer::Deref` are likewise
/// ruled out by the contract of `Pin::new_unchecked`.
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
#[inline(always)]
pub fn as_ref(&self) -> Pin<&Ptr::Target> {
// SAFETY: see documentation on this function
unsafe { Pin::new_unchecked(&*self.__pointer) }
}
/// Unwraps this `Pin<Ptr>`, returning the underlying `Ptr`.
///
/// # Safety
///
/// This function is unsafe. You must guarantee that you will continue to
/// treat the pointer `Ptr` as pinned after you call this function, so that
/// the invariants on the `Pin` type can be upheld. If the code using the
/// resulting `Ptr` does not continue to maintain the pinning invariants that
/// is a violation of the API contract and may lead to undefined behavior in
/// later (safe) operations.
///
/// Note that you must be able to guarantee that the data pointed to by `Ptr`
/// will be treated as pinned all the way until its `drop` handler is complete!
///
/// *For more information, see the [`pin` module docs][self]*
///
/// If the underlying data is [`Unpin`], [`Pin::into_inner`] should be used
/// instead.
#[inline(always)]
#[rustc_const_unstable(feature = "const_pin", issue = "76654")]
#[stable(feature = "pin_into_inner", since = "1.39.0")]
pub const unsafe fn into_inner_unchecked(pin: Pin<Ptr>) -> Ptr {
pin.__pointer
}
}
impl<Ptr: DerefMut> Pin<Ptr> {
/// Gets a mutable reference to the pinned value this `Pin<Ptr>` points to.
///
/// This is a generic method to go from `&mut Pin<Pointer<T>>` to `Pin<&mut T>`.
/// It is safe because, as part of the contract of `Pin::new_unchecked`,
/// the pointee cannot move after `Pin<Pointer<T>>` got created.
/// "Malicious" implementations of `Pointer::DerefMut` are likewise
/// ruled out by the contract of `Pin::new_unchecked`.
///
/// This method is useful when doing multiple calls to functions that consume the
/// pinning pointer.
///
/// # Example
///
/// ```
/// use std::pin::Pin;
///
/// # struct Type {}
/// impl Type {
/// fn method(self: Pin<&mut Self>) {
/// // do something
/// }
///
/// fn call_method_twice(mut self: Pin<&mut Self>) {
/// // `method` consumes `self`, so reborrow the `Pin<&mut Self>` via `as_mut`.
/// self.as_mut().method();
/// self.as_mut().method();
/// }
/// }
/// ```
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
#[inline(always)]
pub fn as_mut(&mut self) -> Pin<&mut Ptr::Target> {
// SAFETY: see documentation on this function
unsafe { Pin::new_unchecked(&mut *self.__pointer) }
}
/// Assigns a new value to the memory location pointed to by the `Pin<Ptr>`.
///
/// This overwrites pinned data, but that is okay: the original pinned value's destructor gets
/// run before being overwritten and the new value is also a valid value of the same type, so
/// no pinning invariant is violated. See [the `pin` module documentation][subtle-details]
/// for more information on how this upholds the pinning invariants.
///
/// # Example
///
/// ```
/// use std::pin::Pin;
///
/// let mut val: u8 = 5;
/// let mut pinned: Pin<&mut u8> = Pin::new(&mut val);
/// println!("{}", pinned); // 5
/// pinned.set(10);
/// println!("{}", pinned); // 10
/// ```
///
/// [subtle-details]: self#subtle-details-and-the-drop-guarantee
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
#[inline(always)]
pub fn set(&mut self, value: Ptr::Target)
where
Ptr::Target: Sized,
{
*(self.__pointer) = value;
}
}
impl<'a, T: ?Sized> Pin<&'a T> {
/// Constructs a new pin by mapping the interior value.
///
/// For example, if you wanted to get a `Pin` of a field of something,
/// you could use this to get access to that field in one line of code.
/// However, there are several gotchas with these "pinning projections";
/// see the [`pin` module] documentation for further details on that topic.
///
/// # Safety
///
/// This function is unsafe. You must guarantee that the data you return
/// will not move so long as the argument value does not move (for example,
/// because it is one of the fields of that value), and also that you do
/// not move out of the argument you receive to the interior function.
///
/// [`pin` module]: self#projections-and-structural-pinning
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
pub unsafe fn map_unchecked<U, F>(self, func: F) -> Pin<&'a U>
where
U: ?Sized,
F: FnOnce(&T) -> &U,
{
let pointer = &*self.__pointer;
let new_pointer = func(pointer);
// SAFETY: the safety contract for `new_unchecked` must be
// upheld by the caller.
unsafe { Pin::new_unchecked(new_pointer) }
}
/// Gets a shared reference out of a pin.
///
/// This is safe because it is not possible to move out of a shared reference.
/// It may seem like there is an issue here with interior mutability: in fact,
/// it *is* possible to move a `T` out of a `&RefCell<T>`. However, this is
/// not a problem as long as there does not also exist a `Pin<&T>` pointing
/// to the inner `T` inside the `RefCell`, and `RefCell<T>` does not let you get a
/// `Pin<&T>` pointer to its contents. See the discussion on ["pinning projections"]
/// for further details.
///
/// Note: `Pin` also implements `Deref` to the target, which can be used
/// to access the inner value. However, `Deref` only provides a reference
/// that lives for as long as the borrow of the `Pin`, not the lifetime of
/// the reference contained in the `Pin`. This method allows turning the `Pin` into a reference
/// with the same lifetime as the reference it wraps.
///
/// ["pinning projections"]: self#projections-and-structural-pinning
#[inline(always)]
#[must_use]
#[rustc_const_unstable(feature = "const_pin", issue = "76654")]
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
pub const fn get_ref(self) -> &'a T {
self.__pointer
}
}
impl<'a, T: ?Sized> Pin<&'a mut T> {
/// Converts this `Pin<&mut T>` into a `Pin<&T>` with the same lifetime.
#[inline(always)]
#[must_use = "`self` will be dropped if the result is not used"]
#[rustc_const_unstable(feature = "const_pin", issue = "76654")]
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
pub const fn into_ref(self) -> Pin<&'a T> {
Pin { __pointer: self.__pointer }
}
/// Gets a mutable reference to the data inside of this `Pin`.
///
/// This requires that the data inside this `Pin` is `Unpin`.
///
/// Note: `Pin` also implements `DerefMut` to the data, which can be used
/// to access the inner value. However, `DerefMut` only provides a reference
/// that lives for as long as the borrow of the `Pin`, not the lifetime of
/// the `Pin` itself. This method allows turning the `Pin` into a reference
/// with the same lifetime as the original `Pin`.
#[inline(always)]
#[must_use = "`self` will be dropped if the result is not used"]
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
#[rustc_const_unstable(feature = "const_pin", issue = "76654")]
pub const fn get_mut(self) -> &'a mut T
where
T: Unpin,
{
self.__pointer
}
/// Gets a mutable reference to the data inside of this `Pin`.
///
/// # Safety
///
/// This function is unsafe. You must guarantee that you will never move
/// the data out of the mutable reference you receive when you call this
/// function, so that the invariants on the `Pin` type can be upheld.
///
/// If the underlying data is `Unpin`, `Pin::get_mut` should be used
/// instead.
#[inline(always)]
#[must_use = "`self` will be dropped if the result is not used"]
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
#[rustc_const_unstable(feature = "const_pin", issue = "76654")]
pub const unsafe fn get_unchecked_mut(self) -> &'a mut T {
self.__pointer
}
/// Construct a new pin by mapping the interior value.
///
/// For example, if you wanted to get a `Pin` of a field of something,
/// you could use this to get access to that field in one line of code.
/// However, there are several gotchas with these "pinning projections";
/// see the [`pin` module] documentation for further details on that topic.
///
/// # Safety
///
/// This function is unsafe. You must guarantee that the data you return
/// will not move so long as the argument value does not move (for example,
/// because it is one of the fields of that value), and also that you do
/// not move out of the argument you receive to the interior function.
///
/// [`pin` module]: self#projections-and-structural-pinning
#[must_use = "`self` will be dropped if the result is not used"]
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
pub unsafe fn map_unchecked_mut<U, F>(self, func: F) -> Pin<&'a mut U>
where
U: ?Sized,
F: FnOnce(&mut T) -> &mut U,
{
// SAFETY: the caller is responsible for not moving the
// value out of this reference.
let pointer = unsafe { Pin::get_unchecked_mut(self) };
let new_pointer = func(pointer);
// SAFETY: as the value of `this` is guaranteed to not have
// been moved out, this call to `new_unchecked` is safe.
unsafe { Pin::new_unchecked(new_pointer) }
}
}
impl<T: ?Sized> Pin<&'static T> {
/// Get a pinning reference from a `&'static` reference.
///
/// This is safe because `T` is borrowed immutably for the `'static` lifetime, which
/// never ends.
#[stable(feature = "pin_static_ref", since = "1.61.0")]
#[rustc_const_unstable(feature = "const_pin", issue = "76654")]
pub const fn static_ref(r: &'static T) -> Pin<&'static T> {
// SAFETY: The 'static borrow guarantees the data will not be
// moved/invalidated until it gets dropped (which is never).
unsafe { Pin::new_unchecked(r) }
}
}
impl<'a, Ptr: DerefMut> Pin<&'a mut Pin<Ptr>> {
/// Gets `Pin<&mut T>` to the underlying pinned value from this nested `Pin`-pointer.
///
/// This is a generic method to go from `Pin<&mut Pin<Pointer<T>>>` to `Pin<&mut T>`. It is
/// safe because the existence of a `Pin<Pointer<T>>` ensures that the pointee, `T`, cannot
/// move in the future, and this method does not enable the pointee to move. "Malicious"
/// implementations of `Ptr::DerefMut` are likewise ruled out by the contract of
/// `Pin::new_unchecked`.
#[unstable(feature = "pin_deref_mut", issue = "86918")]
#[must_use = "`self` will be dropped if the result is not used"]
#[inline(always)]
pub fn as_deref_mut(self) -> Pin<&'a mut Ptr::Target> {
// SAFETY: What we're asserting here is that going from
//
// Pin<&mut Pin<Ptr>>
//
// to
//
// Pin<&mut Ptr::Target>
//
// is safe.
//
// We need to ensure that two things hold for that to be the case:
//
// 1) Once we give out a `Pin<&mut Ptr::Target>`, an `&mut Ptr::Target` will not be given out.
// 2) By giving out a `Pin<&mut Ptr::Target>`, we do not risk of violating
// `Pin<&mut Pin<Ptr>>`
//
// The existence of `Pin<Ptr>` is sufficient to guarantee #1: since we already have a
// `Pin<Ptr>`, it must already uphold the pinning guarantees, which must mean that
// `Pin<&mut Ptr::Target>` does as well, since `Pin::as_mut` is safe. We do not have to rely
// on the fact that `Ptr` is _also_ pinned.
//
// For #2, we need to ensure that code given a `Pin<&mut Ptr::Target>` cannot cause the
// `Pin<Ptr>` to move? That is not possible, since `Pin<&mut Ptr::Target>` no longer retains
// any access to the `Ptr` itself, much less the `Pin<Ptr>`.
unsafe { self.get_unchecked_mut() }.as_mut()
}
}
impl<T: ?Sized> Pin<&'static mut T> {
/// Get a pinning mutable reference from a static mutable reference.
///
/// This is safe because `T` is borrowed for the `'static` lifetime, which
/// never ends.
#[stable(feature = "pin_static_ref", since = "1.61.0")]
#[rustc_const_unstable(feature = "const_pin", issue = "76654")]
pub const fn static_mut(r: &'static mut T) -> Pin<&'static mut T> {
// SAFETY: The 'static borrow guarantees the data will not be
// moved/invalidated until it gets dropped (which is never).
unsafe { Pin::new_unchecked(r) }
}
}
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
impl<Ptr: Deref> Deref for Pin<Ptr> {
type Target = Ptr::Target;
fn deref(&self) -> &Ptr::Target {
Pin::get_ref(Pin::as_ref(self))
}
}
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
impl<Ptr: DerefMut<Target: Unpin>> DerefMut for Pin<Ptr> {
fn deref_mut(&mut self) -> &mut Ptr::Target {
Pin::get_mut(Pin::as_mut(self))
}
}
#[unstable(feature = "deref_pure_trait", issue = "87121")]
unsafe impl<Ptr: DerefPure> DerefPure for Pin<Ptr> {}
#[unstable(feature = "receiver_trait", issue = "none")]
impl<Ptr: Receiver> Receiver for Pin<Ptr> {}
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
impl<Ptr: fmt::Debug> fmt::Debug for Pin<Ptr> {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
fmt::Debug::fmt(&self.__pointer, f)
}
}
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
impl<Ptr: fmt::Display> fmt::Display for Pin<Ptr> {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
fmt::Display::fmt(&self.__pointer, f)
}
}
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
impl<Ptr: fmt::Pointer> fmt::Pointer for Pin<Ptr> {
fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter<'_>) -> fmt::Result {
fmt::Pointer::fmt(&self.__pointer, f)
}
}
// Note: this means that any impl of `CoerceUnsized` that allows coercing from
// a type that impls `Deref<Target=impl !Unpin>` to a type that impls
// `Deref<Target=Unpin>` is unsound. Any such impl would probably be unsound
// for other reasons, though, so we just need to take care not to allow such
// impls to land in std.
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
impl<Ptr, U> CoerceUnsized<Pin<U>> for Pin<Ptr> where Ptr: CoerceUnsized<U> {}
#[stable(feature = "pin", since = "1.33.0")]
impl<Ptr, U> DispatchFromDyn<Pin<U>> for Pin<Ptr> where Ptr: DispatchFromDyn<U> {}
/// Constructs a <code>[Pin]<[&mut] T></code>, by pinning a `value: T` locally.
///
/// Unlike [`Box::pin`], this does not create a new heap allocation. As explained
/// below, the element might still end up on the heap however.
///
/// The local pinning performed by this macro is usually dubbed "stack"-pinning.
/// Outside of `async` contexts locals do indeed get stored on the stack. In
/// `async` functions or blocks however, any locals crossing an `.await` point
/// are part of the state captured by the `Future`, and will use the storage of
/// those. That storage can either be on the heap or on the stack. Therefore,
/// local pinning is a more accurate term.
///
/// If the type of the given value does not implement [`Unpin`], then this macro
/// pins the value in memory in a way that prevents moves. On the other hand,
/// if the type does implement [`Unpin`], <code>[Pin]<[&mut] T></code> behaves
/// like <code>[&mut] T</code>, and operations such as
/// [`mem::replace()`][crate::mem::replace] or [`mem::take()`](crate::mem::take)
/// will allow moves of the value.
/// See [the `Unpin` section of the `pin` module][self#unpin] for details.
///
/// ## Examples
///
/// ### Basic usage
///
/// ```rust
/// # use core::marker::PhantomPinned as Foo;
/// use core::pin::{pin, Pin};
///
/// fn stuff(foo: Pin<&mut Foo>) {
/// // …
/// # let _ = foo;
/// }
///
/// let pinned_foo = pin!(Foo { /* … */ });
/// stuff(pinned_foo);
/// // or, directly:
/// stuff(pin!(Foo { /* … */ }));
/// ```
///
/// ### Manually polling a `Future` (without `Unpin` bounds)
///
/// ```rust
/// use std::{
/// future::Future,
/// pin::pin,
/// task::{Context, Poll},
/// thread,
/// };
/// # use std::{sync::Arc, task::Wake, thread::Thread};
///
/// # /// A waker that wakes up the current thread when called.
/// # struct ThreadWaker(Thread);
/// #
/// # impl Wake for ThreadWaker {
/// # fn wake(self: Arc<Self>) {
/// # self.0.unpark();
/// # }
/// # }
/// #
/// /// Runs a future to completion.
/// fn block_on<Fut: Future>(fut: Fut) -> Fut::Output {
/// let waker_that_unparks_thread = // …
/// # Arc::new(ThreadWaker(thread::current())).into();
/// let mut cx = Context::from_waker(&waker_that_unparks_thread);
/// // Pin the future so it can be polled.
/// let mut pinned_fut = pin!(fut);
/// loop {
/// match pinned_fut.as_mut().poll(&mut cx) {
/// Poll::Pending => thread::park(),
/// Poll::Ready(res) => return res,
/// }
/// }
/// }
/// #
/// # assert_eq!(42, block_on(async { 42 }));
/// ```
///
/// ### With `Coroutine`s
///
/// ```rust
/// #![feature(coroutines)]
/// #![feature(coroutine_trait)]
/// use core::{
/// ops::{Coroutine, CoroutineState},
/// pin::pin,
/// };
///
/// fn coroutine_fn() -> impl Coroutine<Yield = usize, Return = ()> /* not Unpin */ {
/// // Allow coroutine to be self-referential (not `Unpin`)
/// // vvvvvv so that locals can cross yield points.
/// #[coroutine] static || {
/// let foo = String::from("foo");
/// let foo_ref = &foo; // ------+
/// yield 0; // | <- crosses yield point!
/// println!("{foo_ref}"); // <--+
/// yield foo.len();
/// }
/// }
///
/// fn main() {
/// let mut coroutine = pin!(coroutine_fn());
/// match coroutine.as_mut().resume(()) {
/// CoroutineState::Yielded(0) => {},
/// _ => unreachable!(),
/// }
/// match coroutine.as_mut().resume(()) {
/// CoroutineState::Yielded(3) => {},
/// _ => unreachable!(),
/// }
/// match coroutine.resume(()) {
/// CoroutineState::Yielded(_) => unreachable!(),
/// CoroutineState::Complete(()) => {},
/// }
/// }
/// ```
///
/// ## Remarks
///
/// Precisely because a value is pinned to local storage, the resulting <code>[Pin]<[&mut] T></code>
/// reference ends up borrowing a local tied to that block: it can't escape it.
///
/// The following, for instance, fails to compile:
///
/// ```rust,compile_fail
/// use core::pin::{pin, Pin};
/// # use core::{marker::PhantomPinned as Foo, mem::drop as stuff};
///
/// let x: Pin<&mut Foo> = {
/// let x: Pin<&mut Foo> = pin!(Foo { /* … */ });
/// x
/// }; // <- Foo is dropped
/// stuff(x); // Error: use of dropped value
/// ```
///
/// <details><summary>Error message</summary>
///
/// ```console
/// error[E0716]: temporary value dropped while borrowed
/// --> src/main.rs:9:28
/// |
/// 8 | let x: Pin<&mut Foo> = {
/// | - borrow later stored here
/// 9 | let x: Pin<&mut Foo> = pin!(Foo { /* … */ });
/// | ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ creates a temporary value which is freed while still in use
/// 10 | x
/// 11 | }; // <- Foo is dropped
/// | - temporary value is freed at the end of this statement
/// |
/// = note: consider using a `let` binding to create a longer lived value
/// ```
///
/// </details>
///
/// This makes [`pin!`] **unsuitable to pin values when intending to _return_ them**. Instead, the
/// value is expected to be passed around _unpinned_ until the point where it is to be consumed,
/// where it is then useful and even sensible to pin the value locally using [`pin!`].
///
/// If you really need to return a pinned value, consider using [`Box::pin`] instead.
///
/// On the other hand, local pinning using [`pin!`] is likely to be cheaper than
/// pinning into a fresh heap allocation using [`Box::pin`]. Moreover, by virtue of not
/// requiring an allocator, [`pin!`] is the main non-`unsafe` `#![no_std]`-compatible [`Pin`]
/// constructor.
///
/// [`Box::pin`]: ../../std/boxed/struct.Box.html#method.pin
#[stable(feature = "pin_macro", since = "1.68.0")]
#[rustc_macro_transparency = "semitransparent"]
#[allow_internal_unstable(unsafe_pin_internals)]
pub macro pin($value:expr $(,)?) {
// This is `Pin::new_unchecked(&mut { $value })`, so, for starters, let's
// review such a hypothetical macro (that any user-code could define):
//
// ```rust
// macro_rules! pin {( $value:expr ) => (
// match &mut { $value } { at_value => unsafe { // Do not wrap `$value` in an `unsafe` block.
// $crate::pin::Pin::<&mut _>::new_unchecked(at_value)
// }}
// )}
// ```
//
// Safety:
// - `type P = &mut _`. There are thus no pathological `Deref{,Mut}` impls
// that would break `Pin`'s invariants.
// - `{ $value }` is braced, making it a _block expression_, thus **moving**
// the given `$value`, and making it _become an **anonymous** temporary_.
// By virtue of being anonymous, it can no longer be accessed, thus
// preventing any attempts to `mem::replace` it or `mem::forget` it, _etc._
//
// This gives us a `pin!` definition that is sound, and which works, but only
// in certain scenarios:
// - If the `pin!(value)` expression is _directly_ fed to a function call:
// `let poll = pin!(fut).poll(cx);`
// - If the `pin!(value)` expression is part of a scrutinee:
// ```rust
// match pin!(fut) { pinned_fut => {
// pinned_fut.as_mut().poll(...);
// pinned_fut.as_mut().poll(...);
// }} // <- `fut` is dropped here.
// ```
// Alas, it doesn't work for the more straight-forward use-case: `let` bindings.
// ```rust
// let pinned_fut = pin!(fut); // <- temporary value is freed at the end of this statement
// pinned_fut.poll(...) // error[E0716]: temporary value dropped while borrowed
// // note: consider using a `let` binding to create a longer lived value
// ```
// - Issues such as this one are the ones motivating https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/pull/66
//
// This makes such a macro incredibly unergonomic in practice, and the reason most macros
// out there had to take the path of being a statement/binding macro (_e.g._, `pin!(future);`)
// instead of featuring the more intuitive ergonomics of an expression macro.
//
// Luckily, there is a way to avoid the problem. Indeed, the problem stems from the fact that a
// temporary is dropped at the end of its enclosing statement when it is part of the parameters
// given to function call, which has precisely been the case with our `Pin::new_unchecked()`!
// For instance,
// ```rust
// let p = Pin::new_unchecked(&mut <temporary>);
// ```
// becomes:
// ```rust
// let p = { let mut anon = <temporary>; &mut anon };
// ```
//
// However, when using a literal braced struct to construct the value, references to temporaries
// can then be taken. This makes Rust change the lifespan of such temporaries so that they are,
// instead, dropped _at the end of the enscoping block_.
// For instance,
// ```rust
// let p = Pin { __pointer: &mut <temporary> };
// ```
// becomes:
// ```rust
// let mut anon = <temporary>;
// let p = Pin { __pointer: &mut anon };
// ```
// which is *exactly* what we want.
//
// See https://doc.rust-lang.org/1.58.1/reference/destructors.html#temporary-lifetime-extension
// for more info.
$crate::pin::Pin::<&mut _> { __pointer: &mut { $value } }
}