internal: add tuple struct support in pin_data and pin_init! (V2)#155
Open
mqqz wants to merge 4 commits into
Open
internal: add tuple struct support in pin_data and pin_init! (V2)#155mqqz wants to merge 4 commits into
pin_data and pin_init! (V2)#155mqqz wants to merge 4 commits into
Conversation
c9dab99 to
1f2c279
Compare
nbdd0121
reviewed
May 25, 2026
Add plumbing for tuple struct support to `#[pin_data]` by generating tuple struct projections and tuple-aware pin-data metadata. Keep the projection API native to Rust tuple structs, so projected fields are accessed as `.0`, `.1`, etc. instead of introducing synthetic public field names. Signed-off-by: Mohamad Alsadhan <mo@sdhn.cc>
Expand `init!` and `pin_init!` to initialize tuple structs using both indexed brace syntax and tuple-constructor syntax. Add tuple-specific runtime and UI coverage for the basic initializer forms, duplicate/missing fields, invalid indices, and syntax errors. Signed-off-by: Mohamad Alsadhan <mo@sdhn.cc>
Extend tuple-struct coverage with the semantic cases that are easiest to review independently from the implementation changes. Add runtime coverage for generic and const-generic tuple structs, `Unpin` behaviour with `!Unpin` field types, pinned drop, and fallible partial-init rollback. Signed-off-by: Mohamad Alsadhan <mo@sdhn.cc>
Support tuple structs whose final field or final constructor argument is removed by #[cfg]. This preserves tuple indices without needing to evaluate user cfgs in the proc macro. Reject #[cfg] on earlier tuple fields and tuple constructor arguments, because those cases would require reindexing the remaining fields after cfg stripping. That is possible to generate, but the extra complexity is not justified for the tuple struct support added here. Add regression tests for the supported final-field case and UI diagnostics for the unsupported index-shifting cases. Signed-off-by: Mohamad Alsadhan <mo@sdhn.cc>
1f2c279 to
2d2042e
Compare
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Replaces #113.
This adds tuple struct support to
#[pin_data],init!, andpin_init!.The projected form of a tuple struct is also a tuple struct, so projected fields are accessed with native tuple syntax (
.0,.1, ...), which keeps the generated API closer toordinary Rust and avoids exposing synthetic field names (also makes it easier fields are
cfg'd out).#[pin_data]pin_init!(Foo { 0 <- ..., 1: ... })pin_init!(Foo(...))(but no<-e.g.Foo(a, <- b, c)is rejected)support for tuple structs when fields or constructor arguments are removed by(Error out unless#[cfg]#[cfg]is on the final tuple field)Notes
._0like last time.cfg handling does not try to evaluate user#[cfg]conditions in the proc macroinstead, the macro generates the necessary cfg-dependent layouts and lets rustc select the active branch#[cfg]is supported only on the final tuple field / constructor argument, when it does not change numbering.Tests
Added coverage for:
#[pin]interaction with!Unpinfield typesfeature-dependent cfg field layoutsComparison with the old PR
This replaces the earlier attempt in #113.
Compared with that PR, this version is intentionally narrower and easier to review:
cfghandling wasredesigned to correctly handlesimplified to accept only on last field/arg. or error outcfg-stripped tuple fields and constructor argumentsCloses: #85