<< All versions
Skill v1.0.1
currentAutomated scan100/100zhanghandong/rust-skills/m04-zero-cost
3 files
──Details
PublishedMay 15, 2026 at 02:52 AM
Content Hashsha256:3a2eed8faf0a0087...
Git SHA37e050f490a7
Bump Typepatch
──Files
Files (1 file, 4.6 KB)
SKILL.md4.6 KBactive
SKILL.md · 167 lines · 4.6 KB
version: "1.0.1" name: m04-zero-cost description: "CRITICAL: Use for generics, traits, zero-cost abstraction. Triggers: E0277, E0308, E0599, generic, trait, impl, dyn, where, monomorphization, static dispatch, dynamic dispatch, impl Trait, trait bound not satisfied, 泛型, 特征, 零成本抽象, 单态化" user-invocable: false
Zero-Cost Abstraction
Layer 1: Language Mechanics
Core Question
Do we need compile-time or runtime polymorphism?
Before choosing between generics and trait objects:
- Is the type known at compile time?
- Is a heterogeneous collection needed?
- What's the performance priority?
Error → Design Question
| Error | Don't Just Say | Ask Instead | |
|---|---|---|---|
| E0277 | "Add trait bound" | Is this abstraction at the right level? | |
| E0308 | "Fix the type" | Should types be unified or distinct? | |
| E0599 | "Import the trait" | Is the trait the right abstraction? | |
| E0038 | "Make object-safe" | Do we really need dynamic dispatch? |
Thinking Prompt
Before adding trait bounds:
- What abstraction is needed?
- Same behavior, different types → trait
- Different behavior, same type → enum
- No abstraction needed → concrete type
- When is type known?
- Compile time → generics (static dispatch)
- Runtime → trait objects (dynamic dispatch)
- What's the trade-off priority?
- Performance → generics
- Compile time → trait objects
- Flexibility → depends
Trace Up ↑
When type system fights back:
E0277 (trait bound not satisfied)↑ Ask: Is the abstraction level correct?↑ Check: m09-domain (what behavior is being abstracted?)↑ Check: m05-type-driven (should use newtype?)
| Persistent Error | Trace To | Question | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Complex trait bounds | m09-domain | Is the abstraction right? | |
| Object safety issues | m05-type-driven | Can typestate help? | |
| Type explosion | m10-performance | Accept dyn overhead? |
Trace Down ↓
From design to implementation:
"Need to abstract over types with same behavior"↓ Types known at compile time → impl Trait or generics↓ Types determined at runtime → dyn Trait"Need collection of different types"↓ Closed set → enum↓ Open set → Vec<Box<dyn Trait>>"Need to return different types"↓ Same type → impl Trait↓ Different types → Box<dyn Trait>
Quick Reference
| Pattern | Dispatch | Code Size | Runtime Cost | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
fn foo<T: Trait>() | Static | +bloat | Zero | |
fn foo(x: &dyn Trait) | Dynamic | Minimal | vtable lookup | |
impl Trait return | Static | +bloat | Zero | |
Box<dyn Trait> | Dynamic | Minimal | Allocation + vtable |
Syntax Comparison
rust
// Static dispatch - type known at compile timefn process(x: impl Display) { } // argument positionfn process<T: Display>(x: T) { } // explicit genericfn get() -> impl Display { } // return position// Dynamic dispatch - type determined at runtimefn process(x: &dyn Display) { } // referencefn process(x: Box<dyn Display>) { } // owned
Error Code Reference
| Error | Cause | Quick Fix | |
|---|---|---|---|
| E0277 | Type doesn't impl trait | Add impl or change bound | |
| E0308 | Type mismatch | Check generic params | |
| E0599 | No method found | Import trait with use | |
| E0038 | Trait not object-safe | Use generics or redesign |
Decision Guide
| Scenario | Choose | Why | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Performance critical | Generics | Zero runtime cost | |
| Heterogeneous collection | dyn Trait | Different types at runtime | |
| Plugin architecture | dyn Trait | Unknown types at compile | |
| Reduce compile time | dyn Trait | Less monomorphization | |
| Small, known type set | enum | No indirection |
Object Safety
A trait is object-safe if it:
- Doesn't have
Self: Sizedbound - Doesn't return
Self - Doesn't have generic methods
- Uses
where Self: Sizedfor non-object-safe methods
Anti-Patterns
| Anti-Pattern | Why Bad | Better | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Over-generic everything | Compile time, complexity | Concrete types when possible | |
dyn for known types | Unnecessary indirection | Generics | |
| Complex trait hierarchies | Hard to understand | Simpler design | |
| Ignore object safety | Limits flexibility | Plan for dyn if needed |
Related Skills
| When | See | |
|---|---|---|
| Type-driven design | m05-type-driven | |
| Domain abstraction | m09-domain | |
| Performance concerns | m10-performance | |
| Send/Sync bounds | m07-concurrency |