How do I specify that a value in a struct must be one of a fixed number of possible values?

[ustu]

I want to ensure that the value of a field is always only one of a fixed range of possible values.

Is this the right way to do such a thing?

const STATES: [String] = ["DEAD", "PROCESSING", "ACCEPTED", "DELETED", "NOTACCEPTED"];

pub struct MyStruct {
    id: String,
    state: STATES,
}

thanks!

[alice]

Use an enum.

[bradleyharden]

No, you should define an enum:

pub enum State {
    Dead,
    Processing,
    Accepted,
    Deleted,
    NotAccepted,
}

pub struct MyStruct {
    id: String,
    state: State,
}

See the book chapter for more details

[ustu]

I had thought that an enum would result in a number being stored rather than a string.

So say for example I change the enum then the stored numbers would be wrong.

But in thinking about it, maybe that would be an issue in a database lookup where the values have a number key, but perhaps not the same issue as in compiled Rust because it's all in memory.

Am I thinking in the right direction to understand this? Basically that the "num" part of enum is not really relevant.

[bradleyharden]

I don't think you need to worry about how the enum is represented in memory. If you need a String representation of each state, you can implement From<State> for String or some other conversion method.

impl From<State> for String {
    fn from(state: State) -> String {
        match state {
            State::Dead => "Dead".to_owned(),
            // ...
        }
    }
}

[cole-miller]

I would probably choose &'static str as the return type here, and definitely use an inherent method rather than a From impl, but otherwise endorsed.

[bradleyharden]

Agreed. That's a better choice.

[ustu]

Can the enum definition be inlined in the struct?

I just tried this in my IDE and did not like it:

pub struct MyStruct {
    id: String,
    state: {Dead, Processing,  Accepted, Deleted,  NotAccepted},
}

Nor did it like:

pub struct MyStruct {
    id: String,
    state: enum {Dead, Processing,  Accepted, Deleted,  NotAccepted},
}

[bradleyharden]

No, you have to declare it separately. I think there have been some RFCs related to anonymous enums, but I don't know if they relate to this situation.

[moy2010]

@cole-miller

I would probably choose &'static str as the return type

Could you please elaborate on why returning &'static str would be better? I guess that it would be more flexible, but would like to hear your thoughts on this.

[cole-miller]

If your function can only ever return string literals, &'static str is the most natural return type, the one that best expresses your intent in writing the function. It also saves a heap allocation (in String::to_owned) without complicating the code any, which never hurts. Finally, while it's easy to get a String from a &'static str, the inverse requires leaking an allocation, which is unidiomatic at best, so (as you noted) returning &'static str gives more flexibility to the caller.

[bradleyharden]

Agreed. I wasn't really thinking when I wrote my earlier post. I just saw "needs string from state" and jumped to the first solution that came to mind.