Debug and Display
All types which want to be printable must implement the std::fmt
formatting trait: std::fmt::Debug
or std::fmt::Display
.
Automatic implementations are only provided for types such as in the std
library. All others have to be manually implemented.
Debug
The implementation of Debug
is very straightforward: All types can derive
the std::fmt::Debug
implementation. This is not true for std::fmt::Display
which must be manually implemented.
{:?}
must be used to print out the type which has implemented the Debug
trait.
#![allow(unused)] fn main() { // This structure cannot be printed either with `fmt::Display` or // with `fmt::Debug`. struct UnPrintable(i32); // To make this struct printable with `fmt::Debug`, we can derive the automatic implementations provided by Rust #[derive(Debug)] struct DebugPrintable(i32); }
- 🌟
/* Fill in the blanks and Fix the errors */ struct Structure(i32); fn main() { // Types in std and Rust have implemented the fmt::Debug trait println!("__ months in a year.", 12); println!("Now __ will print!", Structure(3)); }
- 🌟🌟 So
fmt::Debug
definitely makes one type printable, but sacrifices some elegance. Maybe we can get more elegant by replacing{:?}
with something else( but not{}
!)
#[derive(Debug)] struct Person { name: String, age: u8 } fn main() { let person = Person { name: "Sunface".to_string(), age: 18 }; /* Make it output: Person { name: "Sunface", age: 18, } */ println!("{:?}", person); }
- 🌟🌟 We can also manually implement
Debug
trait for our types
#[derive(Debug)] struct Structure(i32); #[derive(Debug)] struct Deep(Structure); fn main() { // The problem with `derive` is there is no control over how // the results look. What if I want this to just show a `7`? /* Make it print: Now 7 will print! */ println!("Now {:?} will print!", Deep(Structure(7))); }
Display
Yeah, Debug
is simple and easy to use. But sometimes we want to customize the output appearance of our type. This is where Display
really shines.
Unlike Debug
, there is no way to derive the implementation of the Display
trait, we have to manually implement it.
Another thing to note: the placeholder for Display
is {}
not {:?}
.
- 🌟🌟
/* Make it work*/ use std::fmt; struct Point2D { x: f64, y: f64, } impl fmt::Display for Point2D { /* Implement.. */ } impl fmt::Debug for Point2D { /* Implement.. */ } fn main() { let point = Point2D { x: 3.3, y: 7.2 }; assert_eq!(format!("{}",point), "Display: 3.3 + 7.2i"); assert_eq!(format!("{:?}",point), "Debug: Complex { real: 3.3, imag: 7.2 }"); println!("Success!"); }
?
operator
Implementing fmt::Display
for a structure whose elements must be handled separately is tricky. The problem is each write!
generates a fmt::Result
which must be handled in the same place.
Fortunately, Rust provides the ?
operator to help us eliminate some unnecessary codes for dealing with fmt::Result
.
- 🌟🌟
/* Make it work */ use std::fmt; struct List(Vec<i32>); impl fmt::Display for List { fn fmt(&self, f: &mut fmt::Formatter) -> fmt::Result { // Extract the value using tuple indexing, // and create a reference to `vec`. let vec = &self.0; write!(f, "[")?; // Iterate over `v` in `vec` while enumerating the iteration // count in `count`. for (count, v) in vec.iter().enumerate() { // For every element except the first, add a comma. // Use the ? operator to return on errors. if count != 0 { write!(f, ", ")?; } write!(f, "{}", v)?; } // Close the opened bracket and return a fmt::Result value. write!(f, "]") } } fn main() { let v = List(vec![1, 2, 3]); assert_eq!(format!("{}",v), "[0: 1, 1: 2, 2: 3]"); println!("Success!"); }
You can find the solutions here(under the solutions path), but only use it when you need it :)