deprecating CStr::as_ptr in favor of with_ptr

Author: durka

text/0000-cstr-with-ptr.md

@@ -0,0 +1,126 @@
+- Feature Name: `cstr_with_ptr`
+- Start Date: 2016-06-06
+- RFC PR: (leave this empty)
+- Rust Issue: (leave this empty)
+
+# Summary
+[summary]: #summary
+
+Deprecate `CStr::as_ptr`, which returns a raw pointer and thereby invites unsound code, in favor of
+a new method, `CStr::with_ptr`, which passes the pointer to a user-provided closure.
+
+# Motivation
+[motivation]: #motivation
+
+`CString` wraps a C string and provides easy, safe access to the raw pointer to the string, for
+FFI interop. The safety is correct, as there's nothing unsound about having a raw pointer around
+until you dereference it. However, raw pointers are not tracked by the borrow checker, and once you
+have one it's as easy in Rust as it is in C to keep it around too long (namely, after the backing
+`CString` is dropped) and have a dangling pointer, which leads to unsound code.
+
+There are [hundreds of projects](https://users.rust-lang.org/t/you-should-stop-telling-people-that-safe-rust-is-always-safe/6094/7)
+including a call like `CString::new(...).unwrap().as_ptr()`, which is evidence that this UB
+mistake is widespread.
+
+By changing the API from a method _returning_ a raw pointer to one that runs a user-provided
+closure, we make it easier to write sound code than to write unsound code. Sure, you can still
+have the pointer escape the closure (see [Drawbacks](#drawbacks)), but it's a clear choice. The
+API change tips the scales towards soundness.
+
+# Detailed design
+[design]: #detailed-design
+
+1. Deprecate `CStr::as_ptr`, with the following message: "too easy to misuse because it returns a
+raw pointer; use `with_ptr` instead". The method is stable, so it will not be removed in any 1.x
+release.
+
+2. Add the following method to `CStr`:
+
+ ```rust
+ /// Calls the provided closure, passing the inner pointer to this C string.
+ ///
+ /// The pointer will be valid for as long as `self` is and points to a contiguous region of
+ /// memory terminated with a 0 byte to represent the end of the string.
+ #[allow(deprecated)] // for the as_ptr call
+ fn with_ptr<F: FnOnce(*const c_char)>(&self, f: F) {
+ f(self.as_ptr());
+ }
+ ```
+
+ For example usage see [this playpen](https://play.rust-lang.org/?gist=b6b1495ebee03fea679e95acb6b51ed6).
+
+3. Modify the `CStr` and `CString` examples that use `as_ptr` to use `with_ptr` instead.
+
+ `CString::new` has the following example code:
+
+ ```rust
+ use std::ffi::CString;
+ use std::os::raw::c_char;
+
+ extern { fn puts(s: *const c_char); }
+
+ fn main() {
+ let to_print = CString::new("Hello!").unwrap();
+ unsafe {
+ puts(to_print.as_ptr());
+ }
+ }
+ ```
+
+ Under this proposal, it would change to:
+
+ ```rust
+ use std::ffi::CString;
+ use std::os::raw::c_char;
+
+ extern { fn puts(s: *const c_char); }
+
+ fn main() {
+ let to_print = CString::new("Hello!").unwrap();
+ to_print.with_ptr(|p| unsafe {
+ puts(p);
+ });
+ }
+ ```
+
+ There are nearly identical examples on `CString` and `CStr` themselves which would change in the
+ same way.
+
+# Drawbacks
+[drawbacks]: #drawbacks
+
+- It deprecates another stable method, which contributes to perception of API churn.
+- It adds surface area to the API of `CStr`.
+- It's still rather easy to circumvent the help and write unsound code by "leaking" the pointer out
+of the closure:
+
+```rust
+let mut ptr = ptr::null();
+{
+ let s = CString::new("foo").unwrap();
+ s.with_ptr(|p| { ptr = p; });
+}
+/* ptr is now dangling */
+```
+
+# Alternatives
+[alternatives]: #alternatives
+
+- Do nothing. It remains very easy to write unsound code using `CString` and `CStr::as_ptr`.
+- Move the `temporary_cstring_as_ptr` lint, which warns on the most common way to write said unsound
+code (calling `as_ptr` on a temporary `CString`) from Clippy to rustc.
+
+# Unresolved questions
+[unresolved]: #unresolved-questions
+
+- Should `with_ptr` allow the closure to return a value? It could be
+
+ ```rust
+ fn with_ptr<F: FnOnce(*const c_char) -> O, O>(&self, f: F) -> O {
+ f(self.as_ptr())
+ }
+ ```
+
+ which might be convenient but would make it easier to "leak" the pointer (as easy as
+ `let ptr = s.with_ptr(|p| p);`).
+