book/nostarch/chapter09.md

[TOC]

Error Handling

Errors are a fact of life in software, so Rust has a number of features for handling situations in which something goes wrong. In many cases, Rust requires you to acknowledge the possibility of an error and take some action before your code will compile. This requirement makes your program more robust by ensuring that you’ll discover errors and handle them appropriately before you’ve deployed your code to production!

Rust groups errors into two major categories: recoverable and unrecoverable errors. For a recoverable error, such as a file not found error, we most likely just want to report the problem to the user and retry the operation. Unrecoverable errors are always symptoms of bugs, such as trying to access a location beyond the end of an array, and so we want to immediately stop the program.

Most languages don’t distinguish between these two kinds of errors and handle both in the same way, using mechanisms such as exceptions. Rust doesn’t have exceptions. Instead, it has the type Result<T, E> for recoverable errors and the panic! macro that stops execution when the program encounters an unrecoverable error. This chapter covers calling panic! first and then talks about returning Result<T, E> values. Additionally, we’ll explore considerations when deciding whether to try to recover from an error or to stop execution.

Unrecoverable Errors with panic!

Sometimes bad things happen in your code, and there’s nothing you can do about it. In these cases, Rust has the panic! macro. There are two ways to cause a panic in practice: by taking an action that causes our code to panic (such as accessing an array past the end) or by explicitly calling the panic! macro. In both cases, we cause a panic in our program. By default, these panics will print a failure message, unwind, clean up the stack, and quit. Via an environment variable, you can also have Rust display the call stack when a panic occurs to make it easier to track down the source of the panic.

Unwinding the Stack or Aborting in Response to a Panic

By default, when a panic occurs the program starts unwinding, which means Rust walks back up the stack and cleans up the data from each function it encounters. However, walking back and cleaning up is a lot of work. Rust, therefore, allows you to choose the alternative of immediately aborting, which ends the program without cleaning up.

Memory that the program was using will then need to be cleaned up by the operating system. If in your project you need to make the resultant binary as small as possible, you can switch from unwinding to aborting upon a panic by adding panic = 'abort' to the appropriate [profile] sections in your Cargo.toml file. For example, if you want to abort on panic in release mode, add this:

[profile.release]
panic = 'abort'

Let’s try calling panic! in a simple program:

Filename: src/main.rs

fn main() {
    panic!("crash and burn");
}

When you run the program, you’ll see something like this:

thread 'main' panicked at 'crash and burn', src/main.rs:2:5
note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display
a backtrace

The call to panic! causes the error message contained in the last two lines. The first line shows our panic message and the place in our source code where the panic occurred: src/main.rs:2:5 indicates that it’s the second line, fifth character of our src/main.rs file.

In this case, the line indicated is part of our code, and if we go to that line, we see the panic! macro call. In other cases, the panic! call might be in code that our code calls, and the filename and line number reported by the error message will be someone else’s code where the panic! macro is called, not the line of our code that eventually led to the panic! call.

We can use the backtrace of the functions the panic! call came from to figure out the part of our code that is causing the problem. To understand how to use a panic! backtrace, let’s look at another example and see what it’s like when a panic! call comes from a library because of a bug in our code instead of from our code calling the macro directly. Listing 9-1 has some code that attempts to access an index in a vector beyond the range of valid indexes.

Filename: src/main.rs

fn main() {
    let v = vec![1, 2, 3];

    v[99];
}

Listing 9-1: Attempting to access an element beyond the end of a vector, which will cause a call to panic!

Here, we’re attempting to access the 100th element of our vector (which is at index 99 because indexing starts at zero), but the vector has only three elements. In this situation, Rust will panic. Using [] is supposed to return an element, but if you pass an invalid index, there’s no element that Rust could return here that would be correct.

In C, attempting to read beyond the end of a data structure is undefined behavior. You might get whatever is at the location in memory that would correspond to that element in the data structure, even though the memory doesn’t belong to that structure. This is called a buffer overread and can lead to security vulnerabilities if an attacker is able to manipulate the index in such a way as to read data they shouldn’t be allowed to that is stored after the data structure.

To protect your program from this sort of vulnerability, if you try to read an element at an index that doesn’t exist, Rust will stop execution and refuse to continue. Let’s try it and see:

thread 'main' panicked at 'index out of bounds: the len is 3 but the index is
99', src/main.rs:4:5
note: run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=1` environment variable to display a backtrace

This error points at line 4 of our main.rs where we attempt to access index.

The note: line tells us that we can set the RUST_BACKTRACE environment variable to get a backtrace of exactly what happened to cause the error. A backtrace is a list of all the functions that have been called to get to this point. Backtraces in Rust work as they do in other languages: the key to reading the backtrace is to start from the top and read until you see files you wrote. That’s the spot where the problem originated. The lines above that spot are code that your code has called; the lines below are code that called your code. These before-and-after lines might include core Rust code, standard library code, or crates that you’re using. Let’s try getting a backtrace by setting the RUST_BACKTRACE environment variable to any value except 0. Listing 9-2 shows output similar to what you’ll see.

$ RUST_BACKTRACE=1 cargo run
thread 'main' panicked at 'index out of bounds: the len is 3 but the index is
99', src/main.rs:4:5
stack backtrace:
   0: rust_begin_unwind
             at /rustc/e092d0b6b43f2de967af0887873151bb1c0b18d3/library/std
/src/panicking.rs:584:5
   1: core::panicking::panic_fmt
             at /rustc/e092d0b6b43f2de967af0887873151bb1c0b18d3/library/core
/src/panicking.rs:142:14
   2: core::panicking::panic_bounds_check
             at /rustc/e092d0b6b43f2de967af0887873151bb1c0b18d3/library/core
/src/panicking.rs:84:5
   3: <usize as core::slice::index::SliceIndex<[T]>>::index
             at /rustc/e092d0b6b43f2de967af0887873151bb1c0b18d3/library/core
/src/slice/index.rs:242:10
   4: core::slice::index::<impl core::ops::index::Index<I> for [T]>::index
             at /rustc/e092d0b6b43f2de967af0887873151bb1c0b18d3/library/core
/src/slice/index.rs:18:9
   5: <alloc::vec::Vec<T,A> as core::ops::index::Index<I>>::index
             at /rustc/e092d0b6b43f2de967af0887873151bb1c0b18d3/library/alloc
/src/vec/mod.rs:2591:9
   6: panic::main
             at ./src/main.rs:4:5
   7: core::ops::function::FnOnce::call_once
             at /rustc/e092d0b6b43f2de967af0887873151bb1c0b18d3/library/core
/src/ops/function.rs:248:5
note: Some details are omitted, run with `RUST_BACKTRACE=full` for a verbose
backtrace.

Listing 9-2: The backtrace generated by a call to panic! displayed when the environment variable RUST_BACKTRACE is set

That’s a lot of output! The exact output you see might be different depending on your operating system and Rust version. In order to get backtraces with this information, debug symbols must be enabled. Debug symbols are enabled by default when using cargo build or cargo run without the --release flag, as we have here.

In the output in Listing 9-2, line 6 of the backtrace points to the line in our project that’s causing the problem: line 4 of src/main.rs. If we don’t want our program to panic, we should start our investigation at the location pointed to by the first line mentioning a file we wrote. In Listing 9-1, where we deliberately wrote code that would panic, the way to fix the panic is to not request an element beyond the range of the vector indexes. When your code panics in the future, you’ll need to figure out what action the code is taking with what values to cause the panic and what the code should do instead.

We’ll come back to panic! and when we should and should not use panic! to handle error conditions in “To panic! or Not to panic!” on page XX. Next, we’ll look at how to recover from an error using Result.

Recoverable Errors with Result

Most errors aren’t serious enough to require the program to stop entirely. Sometimes when a function fails it’s for a reason that you can easily interpret and respond to. For example, if you try to open a file and that operation fails because the file doesn’t exist, you might want to create the file instead of terminating the process.

Recall from “Handling Potential Failure with Result” on page XX that the Result enum is defined as having two variants, Ok and Err, as follows:

enum Result<T, E> {
    Ok(T),
    Err(E),
}

The T and E are generic type parameters: we’ll discuss generics in more detail in Chapter 10. What you need to know right now is that T represents the type of the value that will be returned in a success case within the Ok variant, and E represents the type of the error that will be returned in a failure case within the Err variant. Because Result has these generic type parameters, we can use the Result type and the functions defined on it in many different situations where the success value and error value we want to return may differ.

Let’s call a function that returns a Result value because the function could fail. In Listing 9-3 we try to open a file.

Filename: src/main.rs

use std::fs::File;

fn main() {
    let greeting_file_result = File::open("hello.txt");
}

Listing 9-3: Opening a file

The return type of File::open is a Result<T, E>. The generic parameter T has been filled in by the implementation of File::open with the type of the success value, std::fs::File, which is a file handle. The type of E used in the error value is std::io::Error. This return type means the call to File::open might succeed and return a file handle that we can read from or write to. The function call also might fail: for example, the file might not exist, or we might not have permission to access the file. The File::open function needs to have a way to tell us whether it succeeded or failed and at the same time give us either the file handle or error information. This information is exactly what the Result enum conveys.

In the case where File::open succeeds, the value in the variable greeting_file_result will be an instance of Ok that contains a file handle. In the case where it fails, the value in greeting_file_result will be an instance of Err that contains more information about the kind of error that occurred.

We need to add to the code in Listing 9-3 to take different actions depending on the value File::open returns. Listing 9-4 shows one way to handle the Result using a basic tool, the match expression that we discussed in Chapter 6.

Filename: src/main.rs

use std::fs::File;

fn main() {
    let greeting_file_result = File::open("hello.txt");

    let greeting_file = match greeting_file_result {
        Ok(file) => file,
        Err(error) => {
            panic!("Problem opening the file: {:?}", error);
        }
    };
}

Listing 9-4: Using a match expression to handle the Result variants that might be returned

Note that, like the Option enum, the Result enum and its variants have been brought into scope by the prelude, so we don’t need to specify Result:: before the Ok and Err variants in the match arms.

When the result is Ok, this code will return the inner file value out of the Ok variant, and we then assign that file handle value to the variable greeting_file. After the match, we can use the file handle for reading or writing.

The other arm of the match handles the case where we get an Err value from File::open. In this example, we’ve chosen to call the panic! macro. If there’s no file named hello.txt in our current directory and we run this code, we’ll see the following output from the panic! macro:

thread 'main' panicked at 'Problem opening the file: Os { code:
 2, kind: NotFound, message: "No such file or directory" }',
src/main.rs:8:23

As usual, this output tells us exactly what has gone wrong.

Matching on Different Errors

The code in Listing 9-4 will panic! no matter why File::open failed. However, we want to take different actions for different failure reasons. If File::open failed because the file doesn’t exist, we want to create the file and return the handle to the new file. If File::open failed for any other reason—for example, because we didn’t have permission to open the file—we still want the code to panic! in the same way it did in Listing 9-4. For this, we add an inner match expression, shown in Listing 9-5.

Filename: src/main.rs

use std::fs::File;
use std::io::ErrorKind;

fn main() {
    let greeting_file_result = File::open("hello.txt");

    let greeting_file = match greeting_file_result {
        Ok(file) => file,
        Err(error) => match error.kind() {
            ErrorKind::NotFound => {
                match File::create("hello.txt") {
                    Ok(fc) => fc,
                    Err(e) => panic!(
                        "Problem creating the file: {:?}",
                        e
                    ),
                }
            }
            other_error => {
                panic!(
                    "Problem opening the file: {:?}",
                    other_error
                );
            }
        },
    };
}

Listing 9-5: Handling different kinds of errors in different ways

The type of the value that File::open returns inside the Err variant is io::Error, which is a struct provided by the standard library. This struct has a method kind that we can call to get an io::ErrorKind value. The enum io::ErrorKind is provided by the standard library and has variants representing the different kinds of errors that might result from an io operation. The variant we want to use is ErrorKind::NotFound, which indicates the file we’re trying to open doesn’t exist yet. So we match on greeting_file_result, but we also have an inner match on error.kind().

The condition we want to check in the inner match is whether the value returned by error.kind() is the NotFound variant of the ErrorKind enum. If it is, we try to create the file with File::create. However, because File::create could also fail, we need a second arm in the inner match expression. When the file can’t be created, a different error message is printed. The second arm of the outer match stays the same, so the program panics on any error besides the missing file error.

Alternatives to Using match with Result<T, E>

That’s a lot of match! The match expression is very useful but also very much a primitive. In Chapter 13, you’ll learn about closures, which are used with many of the methods defined on Result<T, E>. These methods can be more concise than using match when handling Result<T, E> values in your code.

For example, here’s another way to write the same logic as shown in Listing 9-5, this time using closures and the unwrap_or_else method:

// src/main.rs
use std::fs::File;
use std::io::ErrorKind;

fn main() {
    let greeting_file = File::open("hello.txt").unwrap_or_else(|error| {
        if error.kind() == ErrorKind::NotFound {
            File::create("hello.txt").unwrap_or_else(|error| {
                panic!("Problem creating the file: {:?}", error);
            })
        } else {
            panic!("Problem opening the file: {:?}", error);
        }
    });
}

Although this code has the same behavior as Listing 9-5, it doesn’t contain any match expressions and is cleaner to read. Come back to this example after you’ve read Chapter 13, and look up the unwrap_or_else method in the standard library documentation. Many more of these methods can clean up huge nested match expressions when you’re dealing with errors.

Shortcuts for Panic on Error: unwrap and expect

Using match works well enough, but it can be a bit verbose and doesn’t always communicate intent well. The Result<T, E> type has many helper methods defined on it to do various, more specific tasks. The unwrap method is a shortcut method implemented just like the match expression we wrote in Listing 9-4. If the Result value is the Ok variant, unwrap will return the value inside the Ok. If the Result is the Err variant, unwrap will call the panic! macro for us. Here is an example of unwrap in action:

Filename: src/main.rs

use std::fs::File;

fn main() {
    let greeting_file = File::open("hello.txt").unwrap();
}

If we run this code without a hello.txt file, we’ll see an error message from the panic! call that the unwrap method makes:

thread 'main' panicked at 'called `Result::unwrap()` on an `Err` value: Os {
code: 2, kind: NotFound, message: "No such file or directory" }',
src/main.rs:4:49

Similarly, the expect method lets us also choose the panic! error message. Using expect instead of unwrap and providing good error messages can convey your intent and make tracking down the source of a panic easier. The syntax of expect looks like this:

Filename: src/main.rs

use std::fs::File;

fn main() {
    let greeting_file = File::open("hello.txt")
        .expect("hello.txt should be included in this project");
}

We use expect in the same way as unwrap: to return the file handle or call the panic! macro. The error message used by expect in its call to panic! will be the parameter that we pass to expect, rather than the default panic! message that unwrap uses. Here’s what it looks like:

thread 'main' panicked at 'hello.txt should be included in this project: Os {
code: 2, kind: NotFound, message: "No such file or directory" }',
src/main.rs:5:10

In production-quality code, most Rustaceans choose expect rather than unwrap and give more context about why the operation is expected to always succeed. That way, if your assumptions are ever proven wrong, you have more information to use in debugging.

Propagating Errors

When a function’s implementation calls something that might fail, instead of handling the error within the function itself you can return the error to the calling code so that it can decide what to do. This is known as propagating the error and gives more control to the calling code, where there might be more information or logic that dictates how the error should be handled than what you have available in the context of your code.

For example, Listing 9-6 shows a function that reads a username from a file. If the file doesn’t exist or can’t be read, this function will return those errors to the code that called the function.

Filename: src/main.rs

use std::fs::File;
use std::io::{self, Read};

1 fn read_username_from_file() -> Result<String, io::Error> {
  2 let username_file_result = File::open("hello.txt");

  3 let mut username_file = match username_file_result {
      4 Ok(file) => file,
      5 Err(e) => return Err(e),
    };

  6 let mut username = String::new();

  7 match username_file.read_to_string(&mut username) {
      8 Ok(_) => Ok(username),
      9 Err(e) => Err(e),
    }
}

Listing 9-6: A function that returns errors to the calling code using match

This function can be written in a much shorter way, but we’re going to start by doing a lot of it manually in order to explore error handling; at the end, we’ll show the shorter way. Let’s look at the return type of the function first: Result<String, io::Error> [1]. This means the function is returning a value of the type Result<T, E>, where the generic parameter T has been filled in with the concrete type String and the generic type E has been filled in with the concrete type io::Error.

If this function succeeds without any problems, the code that calls this function will receive an Ok value that holds a String—the username that this function read from the file [8]. If this function encounters any problems, the calling code will receive an Err value that holds an instance of io::Error that contains more information about what the problems were. We chose io::Error as the return type of this function because that happens to be the type of the error value returned from both of the operations we’re calling in this function’s body that might fail: the File::open function [2] and the read_to_string method [7].

The body of the function starts by calling the File::open function [2]. Then we handle the Result value with a match similar to the match in Listing 9-4. If File::open succeeds, the file handle in the pattern variable file [4] becomes the value in the mutable variable username_file [3] and the function continues. In the Err case, instead of calling panic!, we use the return keyword to return early out of the function entirely and pass the error value from File::open, now in the pattern variable e, back to the calling code as this function’s error value [5].

So, if we have a file handle in username_file, the function then creates a new String in variable username [6] and calls the read_to_string method on the file handle in username_file to read the contents of the file into username [7]. The read_to_string method also returns a Result because it might fail, even though File::open succeeded. So we need another match to handle that Result: if read_to_string succeeds, then our function has succeeded, and we return the username from the file that’s now in username wrapped in an Ok. If read_to_string fails, we return the error value in the same way that we returned the error value in the match that handled the return value of File::open. However, we don’t need to explicitly say return, because this is the last expression in the function [9].

The code that calls this code will then handle getting either an Ok value that contains a username or an Err value that contains an io::Error. It’s up to the calling code to decide what to do with those values. If the calling code gets an Err value, it could call panic! and crash the program, use a default username, or look up the username from somewhere other than a file, for example. We don’t have enough information on what the calling code is actually trying to do, so we propagate all the success or error information upward for it to handle appropriately.

This pattern of propagating errors is so common in Rust that Rust provides the question mark operator ? to make this easier.

A Shortcut for Propagating Errors: The ? Operator

Listing 9-7 shows an implementation of read_username_from_file that has the same functionality as in Listing 9-6, but this implementation uses the ? operator.

Filename: src/main.rs

use std::fs::File;
use std::io::{self, Read};

fn read_username_from_file() -> Result<String, io::Error> {
    let mut username_file = File::open("hello.txt")?;
    let mut username = String::new();
    username_file.read_to_string(&mut username)?;
    Ok(username)
}

Listing 9-7: A function that returns errors to the calling code using the ? operator

The ? placed after a Result value is defined to work in almost the same way as the match expressions we defined to handle the Result values in Listing 9-6. If the value of the Result is an Ok, the value inside the Ok will get returned from this expression, and the program will continue. If the value is an Err, the Err will be returned from the whole function as if we had used the return keyword so the error value gets propagated to the calling code.

There is a difference between what the match expression from Listing 9-6 does and what the ? operator does: error values that have the ? operator called on them go through the from function, defined in the From trait in the standard library, which is used to convert values from one type into another. When the ? operator calls the from function, the error type received is converted into the error type defined in the return type of the current function. This is useful when a function returns one error type to represent all the ways a function might fail, even if parts might fail for many different reasons.

For example, we could change the read_username_from_file function in Listing 9-7 to return a custom error type named OurError that we define. If we also define impl From<io::Error> for OurError to construct an instance of OurError from an io::Error, then the ? operator calls in the body of read_username_from_file will call from and convert the error types without needing to add any more code to the function.

In the context of Listing 9-7, the ? at the end of the File::open call will return the value inside an Ok to the variable username_file. If an error occurs, the ? operator will return early out of the whole function and give any Err value to the calling code. The same thing applies to the ? at the end of the read_to_string call.

The ? operator eliminates a lot of boilerplate and makes this function’s implementation simpler. We could even shorten this code further by chaining method calls immediately after the ?, as shown in Listing 9-8.

Filename: src/main.rs

use std::fs::File;
use std::io::{self, Read};

fn read_username_from_file() -> Result<String, io::Error> {
    let mut username = String::new();

    File::open("hello.txt")?.read_to_string(&mut username)?;

    Ok(username)
}

Listing 9-8: Chaining method calls after the ? operator

We’ve moved the creation of the new String in username to the beginning of the function; that part hasn’t changed. Instead of creating a variable username_file, we’ve chained the call to read_to_string directly onto the result of File::open("hello.txt")?. We still have a ? at the end of the read_to_string call, and we still return an Ok value containing username when both File::open and read_to_string succeed rather than returning errors. The functionality is again the same as in Listing 9-6 and Listing 9-7; this is just a different, more ergonomic way to write it.

Listing 9-9 shows a way to make this even shorter using fs::read_to_string.

Filename: src/main.rs

use std::fs;
use std::io;

fn read_username_from_file() -> Result<String, io::Error> {
    fs::read_to_string("hello.txt")
}

Listing 9-9: Using fs::read_to_string instead of opening and then reading the file

Reading a file into a string is a fairly common operation, so the standard library provides the convenient fs::read_to_string function that opens the file, creates a new String, reads the contents of the file, puts the contents into that String, and returns it. Of course, using fs::read_to_string doesn’t give us the opportunity to explain all the error handling, so we did it the longer way first.

Where the ? Operator Can Be Used

The ? operator can only be used in functions whose return type is compatible with the value the ? is used on. This is because the ? operator is defined to perform an early return of a value out of the function, in the same manner as the match expression we defined in Listing 9-6. In Listing 9-6, the match was using a Result value, and the early return arm returned an Err(e) value. The return type of the function has to be a Result so that it’s compatible with this return.

In Listing 9-10, let’s look at the error we’ll get if we use the ? operator in a main function with a return type that is incompatible with the type of the value we use ? on.

Filename: src/main.rs

use std::fs::File;

fn main() {
    let greeting_file = File::open("hello.txt")?;
}

Listing 9-10: Attempting to use the ? in the main function that returns () won’t compile.

This code opens a file, which might fail. The ? operator follows the Result value returned by File::open, but this main function has the return type of (), not Result. When we compile this code, we get the following error message:

error[E0277]: the `?` operator can only be used in a function that returns
`Result` or `Option` (or another type that implements `FromResidual`)
 --> src/main.rs:4:48
  |
3 | / fn main() {
4 | |     let greeting_file = File::open("hello.txt")?;
  | |                                                ^ cannot use the `?`
operator in a function that returns `()`
5 | | }
  | |_- this function should return `Result` or `Option` to accept `?`
  |
  = help: the trait `FromResidual<Result<Infallible, std::io::Error>>` is not
implemented for `()`

This error points out that we’re only allowed to use the ? operator in a function that returns Result, Option, or another type that implements FromResidual.

To fix the error, you have two choices. One choice is to change the return type of your function to be compatible with the value you’re using the ? operator on as long as you have no restrictions preventing that. The other choice is to use a match or one of the Result<T, E> methods to handle the Result<T, E> in whatever way is appropriate.

The error message also mentioned that ? can be used with Option<T> values as well. As with using ? on Result, you can only use ? on Option in a function that returns an Option. The behavior of the ? operator when called on an Option<T> is similar to its behavior when called on a Result<T, E>: if the value is None, the None will be returned early from the function at that point. If the value is Some, the value inside the Some is the resultant value of the expression, and the function continues. Listing 9-11 has an example of a function that finds the last character of the first line in the given text.

fn last_char_of_first_line(text: &str) -> Option<char> {
    text.lines().next()?.chars().last()
}

Listing 9-11: Using the ? operator on an Option<T> value

This function returns Option<char> because it’s possible that there is a character there, but it’s also possible that there isn’t. This code takes the text string slice argument and calls the lines method on it, which returns an iterator over the lines in the string. Because this function wants to examine the first line, it calls next on the iterator to get the first value from the iterator. If text is the empty string, this call to next will return None, in which case we use ? to stop and return None from last_char_of_first_line. If text is not the empty string, next will return a Some value containing a string slice of the first line in text.

The ? extracts the string slice, and we can call chars on that string slice to get an iterator of its characters. We’re interested in the last character in this first line, so we call last to return the last item in the iterator. This is an Option because it’s possible that the first line is the empty string; for example, if text starts with a blank line but has characters on other lines, as in "\nhi". However, if there is a last character on the first line, it will be returned in the Some variant. The ? operator in the middle gives us a concise way to express this logic, allowing us to implement the function in one line. If we couldn’t use the ? operator on Option, we’d have to implement this logic using more method calls or a match expression.

Note that you can use the ? operator on a Result in a function that returns Result, and you can use the ? operator on an Option in a function that returns Option, but you can’t mix and match. The ? operator won’t automatically convert a Result to an Option or vice versa; in those cases, you can use methods like the ok method on Result or the ok_or method on Option to do the conversion explicitly.

So far, all the main functions we’ve used return (). The main function is special because it’s the entry point and exit point of an executable program, and there are restrictions on what its return type can be for the program to behave as expected.

Luckily, main can also return a Result<(), E>. Listing 9-12 has the code from Listing 9-10, but we’ve changed the return type of main to be Result<(), Box<dyn Error>> and added a return value Ok(()) to the end. This code will now compile.

Filename: src/main.rs

use std::error::Error;
use std::fs::File;

fn main() -> Result<(), Box<dyn Error>> {
    let greeting_file = File::open("hello.txt")?;

    Ok(())
}

Listing 9-12: Changing main to return Result<(), E> allows the use of the ? operator on Result values.

The Box<dyn Error> type is a trait object, which we’ll talk about in “Using Trait Objects That Allow for Values of Different Types” on page XX. For now, you can read Box<dyn Error> to mean “any kind of error.” Using ? on a Result value in a main function with the error type Box<dyn Error> is allowed because it allows any Err value to be returned early. Even though the body of this main function will only ever return errors of type std::io::Error, by specifying Box<dyn Error>, this signature will continue to be correct even if more code that returns other errors is added to the body of main.

When a main function returns a Result<(), E>, the executable will exit with a value of 0 if main returns Ok(()) and will exit with a nonzero value if main returns an Err value. Executables written in C return integers when they exit: programs that exit successfully return the integer 0, and programs that error return some integer other than 0. Rust also returns integers from executables to be compatible with this convention.

The main function may return any types that implement the std::process::Termination trait, which contains a function report that returns an ExitCode. Consult the standard library documentation for more information on implementing the Termination trait for your own types.

Now that we’ve discussed the details of calling panic! or returning Result, let’s return to the topic of how to decide which is appropriate to use in which cases.

To panic! or Not to panic!

So how do you decide when you should call panic! and when you should return Result? When code panics, there’s no way to recover. You could call panic! for any error situation, whether there’s a possible way to recover or not, but then you’re making the decision that a situation is unrecoverable on behalf of the calling code. When you choose to return a Result value, you give the calling code options. The calling code could choose to attempt to recover in a way that’s appropriate for its situation, or it could decide that an Err value in this case is unrecoverable, so it can call panic! and turn your recoverable error into an unrecoverable one. Therefore, returning Result is a good default choice when you’re defining a function that might fail.

In situations such as examples, prototype code, and tests, it’s more appropriate to write code that panics instead of returning a Result. Let’s explore why, then discuss situations in which the compiler can’t tell that failure is impossible, but you as a human can. The chapter will conclude with some general guidelines on how to decide whether to panic in library code.

Examples, Prototype Code, and Tests

When you’re writing an example to illustrate some concept, also including robust error-handling code can make the example less clear. In examples, it’s understood that a call to a method like unwrap that could panic is meant as a placeholder for the way you’d want your application to handle errors, which can differ based on what the rest of your code is doing.

Similarly, the unwrap and expect methods are very handy when prototyping, before you’re ready to decide how to handle errors. They leave clear markers in your code for when you’re ready to make your program more robust.

If a method call fails in a test, you’d want the whole test to fail, even if that method isn’t the functionality under test. Because panic! is how a test is marked as a failure, calling unwrap or expect is exactly what should happen.

Cases in Which You Have More Information Than the Compiler

It would also be appropriate to call unwrap or expect when you have some other logic that ensures the Result will have an Ok value, but the logic isn’t something the compiler understands. You’ll still have a Result value that you need to handle: whatever operation you’re calling still has the possibility of failing in general, even though it’s logically impossible in your particular situation. If you can ensure by manually inspecting the code that you’ll never have an Err variant, it’s perfectly acceptable to call unwrap, and even better to document the reason you think you’ll never have an Err variant in the expect text. Here’s an example:

use std::net::IpAddr;

let home: IpAddr = "127.0.0.1"
    .parse()
    .expect("Hardcoded IP address should be valid");

We’re creating an IpAddr instance by parsing a hardcoded string. We can see that 127.0.0.1 is a valid IP address, so it’s acceptable to use expect here. However, having a hardcoded, valid string doesn’t change the return type of the parse method: we still get a Result value, and the compiler will still make us handle the Result as if the Err variant is a possibility because the compiler isn’t smart enough to see that this string is always a valid IP address. If the IP address string came from a user rather than being hardcoded into the program and therefore did have a possibility of failure, we’d definitely want to handle the Result in a more robust way instead. Mentioning the assumption that this IP address is hardcoded will prompt us to change expect to better error-handling code if, in the future, we need to get the IP address from some other source instead.

Guidelines for Error Handling

It’s advisable to have your code panic when it’s possible that your code could end up in a bad state. In this context, a bad state is when some assumption, guarantee, contract, or invariant has been broken, such as when invalid values, contradictory values, or missing values are passed to your code—plus one or more of the following:

• The bad state is something that is unexpected, as opposed to something that will likely happen occasionally, like a user entering data in the wrong format.
• Your code after this point needs to rely on not being in this bad state, rather than checking for the problem at every step.
• There’s not a good way to encode this information in the types you use. We’ll work through an example of what we mean in “Encoding States and Behavior as Types” on page XX.

If someone calls your code and passes in values that don’t make sense, it’s best to return an error if you can so the user of the library can decide what they want to do in that case. However, in cases where continuing could be insecure or harmful, the best choice might be to call panic! and alert the person using your library to the bug in their code so they can fix it during development. Similarly, panic! is often appropriate if you’re calling external code that is out of your control and it returns an invalid state that you have no way of fixing.

However, when failure is expected, it’s more appropriate to return a Result than to make a panic! call. Examples include a parser being given malformed data or an HTTP request returning a status that indicates you have hit a rate limit. In these cases, returning a Result indicates that failure is an expected possibility that the calling code must decide how to handle.

When your code performs an operation that could put a user at risk if it’s called using invalid values, your code should verify the values are valid first and panic if the values aren’t valid. This is mostly for safety reasons: attempting to operate on invalid data can expose your code to vulnerabilities. This is the main reason the standard library will call panic! if you attempt an out-of-bounds memory access: trying to access memory that doesn’t belong to the current data structure is a common security problem. Functions often have contracts: their behavior is only guaranteed if the inputs meet particular requirements. Panicking when the contract is violated makes sense because a contract violation always indicates a caller-side bug, and it’s not a kind of error you want the calling code to have to explicitly handle. In fact, there’s no reasonable way for calling code to recover; the calling programmers need to fix the code. Contracts for a function, especially when a violation will cause a panic, should be explained in the API documentation for the function.

However, having lots of error checks in all of your functions would be verbose and annoying. Fortunately, you can use Rust’s type system (and thus the type checking done by the compiler) to do many of the checks for you. If your function has a particular type as a parameter, you can proceed with your code’s logic knowing that the compiler has already ensured you have a valid value. For example, if you have a type rather than an Option, your program expects to have something rather than nothing. Your code then doesn’t have to handle two cases for the Some and None variants: it will only have one case for definitely having a value. Code trying to pass nothing to your function won’t even compile, so your function doesn’t have to check for that case at runtime. Another example is using an unsigned integer type such as u32, which ensures the parameter is never negative.

Creating Custom Types for Validation

Let’s take the idea of using Rust’s type system to ensure we have a valid value one step further and look at creating a custom type for validation. Recall the guessing game in Chapter 2 in which our code asked the user to guess a number between 1 and 100. We never validated that the user’s guess was between those numbers before checking it against our secret number; we only validated that the guess was positive. In this case, the consequences were not very dire: our output of “Too high” or “Too low” would still be correct. But it would be a useful enhancement to guide the user toward valid guesses and have different behavior when the user guesses a number that’s out of range versus when the user types, for example, letters instead.

One way to do this would be to parse the guess as an i32 instead of only a u32 to allow potentially negative numbers, and then add a check for the number being in range, like so:

Filename: src/main.rs

loop {
    --snip--

    let guess: i32 = match guess.trim().parse() {
        Ok(num) => num,
        Err(_) => continue,
    };

    if guess < 1 || guess > 100 {
        println!("The secret number will be between 1 and 100.");
        continue;
    }

    match guess.cmp(&secret_number) {
        --snip--
}

The if expression checks whether our value is out of range, tells the user about the problem, and calls continue to start the next iteration of the loop and ask for another guess. After the if expression, we can proceed with the comparisons between guess and the secret number knowing that guess is between 1 and 100.

However, this is not an ideal solution: if it were absolutely critical that the program only operated on values between 1 and 100, and it had many functions with this requirement, having a check like this in every function would be tedious (and might impact performance).

Instead, we can make a new type and put the validations in a function to create an instance of the type rather than repeating the validations everywhere. That way, it’s safe for functions to use the new type in their signatures and confidently use the values they receive. Listing 9-13 shows one way to define a Guess type that will only create an instance of Guess if the new function receives a value between 1 and 100.

Filename: src/lib.rs

1 pub struct Guess {
    value: i32,
}

impl Guess {
  2 pub fn new(value: i32) -> Guess {
      3 if value < 1 || value > 100 {
          4 panic!(
                "Guess value must be between 1 and 100, got {}.",
                value
            );
        }

      5 Guess { value }
    }

  6 pub fn value(&self) -> i32 {
        self.value
    }
}

Listing 9-13: A Guess type that will only continue with values between 1 and 100

First we define a struct named Guess that has a field named value that holds an i32 [1]. This is where the number will be stored.

Then we implement an associated function named new on Guess that creates instances of Guess values [2]. The new function is defined to have one parameter named value of type i32 and to return a Guess. The code in the body of the new function tests value to make sure it’s between 1 and 100 [3]. If value doesn’t pass this test, we make a panic! call [4], which will alert the programmer who is writing the calling code that they have a bug they need to fix, because creating a Guess with a value outside this range would violate the contract that Guess::new is relying on. The conditions in which Guess::new might panic should be discussed in its public-facing API documentation; we’ll cover documentation conventions indicating the possibility of a panic! in the API documentation that you create in Chapter 14. If value does pass the test, we create a new Guess with its value field set to the value parameter and return the Guess [5].

Next, we implement a method named value that borrows self, doesn’t have any other parameters, and returns an i32 [6]. This kind of method is sometimes called a getter because its purpose is to get some data from its fields and return it. This public method is necessary because the value field of the Guess struct is private. It’s important that the value field be private so code using the Guess struct is not allowed to set value directly: code outside the module must use the Guess::new function to create an instance of Guess, thereby ensuring there’s no way for a Guess to have a value that hasn’t been checked by the conditions in the Guess::new function.

A function that has a parameter or returns only numbers between 1 and 100 could then declare in its signature that it takes or returns a Guess rather than an i32 and wouldn’t need to do any additional checks in its body.

Summary

Rust’s error-handling features are designed to help you write more robust code. The panic! macro signals that your program is in a state it can’t handle and lets you tell the process to stop instead of trying to proceed with invalid or incorrect values. The Result enum uses Rust’s type system to indicate that operations might fail in a way that your code could recover from. You can use Result to tell code that calls your code that it needs to handle potential success or failure as well. Using panic! and Result in the appropriate situations will make your code more reliable in the face of inevitable problems.

Now that you’ve seen useful ways that the standard library uses generics with the Option and Result enums, we’ll talk about how generics work and how you can use them in your code.