`dyn Trait` syntax in unexpected position

I’ve run into compiler warnings suggesting dyn Trait syntax in locations (1) that are accepted by the compiler but I didn’t expect and can’t find documentation for the semantics or (2) that are invalid.


Playground link

Making the suggested change is accepted, but I didn’t find docs in the dyn trait RFC discussion that make explicit what impl B for dyn A means – does this require that A be object safe?


I don’t have a working playground example for this yet, but I have a project that suggests putting dyn in the trait definition, which is invalid. I suspect this is macro-related and will file a bug if I can get a small reproduction:

warning: trait objects without an explicit `dyn` are deprecated
   --> src/datatype/interface.rs:137:11
137 | pub trait CustomProductionPolicyController {
    |           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ help: use `dyn`: `dyn CustomProductionPolicyController`

According to 1) - are you sure you know what are you doing here? In general writing:

impl Trait for OtherTrait {}

Doesn’t mean "implement Trait for any type implementing OtherTrait" but “implement Trait for any fat-pointer to OtherTrait”, and this is deprecated syntax (the dyn word should be added before OtherTrait). This is important difference - first one is universal, the second one works only for fat pointers. If you meant the first, you should write:

impl<T: OtherTrait> Trait for T {}

The problem is, that it disallows later specialized definitions of Trait for types implementing OtherTrait without specializations (which is unstable feature for now AFAIK).


To avoid loss of generality, you can even add a ?Sized “unbound” on the generic:

impl<T : ?Sized> Trait for T
    T : OtherTrait,
    // ...
1 Like

:man_facepalming: Yeah, not enough coffee yet. Makes perfect sense. Was working backwards from the legitimate error in (2) and didn’t stop to think what I was writing.

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.