Summary: We propose a scheme for annotating lifetimes for references and pointers in C++.
Note: This is a living document that is intended to always reflect the most current semantics and syntax of the lifetime annotations.
This document proposes an attribute-based annotation scheme for C++ that describes object lifetime contracts. Lifetime annotations serve the following goals:
The annotation scheme is inspired by Rust lifetimes, but it is adapted to C++ so that it can be incrementally rolled out to existing C++ codebases. Furthermore, the annotations can be automatically added to an existing codebase by a tool that infers the annotations based on the current behavior of each function’s implementation.
While the annotation scheme can express a large subset of Rust’s lifetime semantics, we have omitted some constructs that we do not expect to be necessary for our purposes. For example, lifetime bounds (e.g. 'a: 'b or T: 'a) may be needed rarely enough that we can do without them, and higher-ranked trait bounds (e.g. where for<'a> F: Fn(&'a i32)) are possible only for function types, which is what they are usually needed for.
We are aware of two existing schemes for annotating lifetimes and flagging lifetime violations in C++; we describe them in the sections “Alternative considered: [[clang::lifetimebound]]” and “Alternative considered: P1179 / -Wdangling-gsl” below. Both of these schemes have limitations that make them unsuitable for our purposes. We plan to enable our lifetime analysis to understand the existing annotations by translating them into our annotation syntax internally (where possible).
To give a feel for how the annotations work in practice, we will first show some examples.
Here is a simple example:
const std::string& [[lifetime(a)]] smaller( const std::string& [[lifetime(a)]] s1, const std::string& [[lifetime(a)]] s2) { if (s1 < s2) { return s1; } else { return s2; } }
The annotation states that both s1 and s2 may be referred to by the return value of the function. This implies that the lifetime of the return value is the shorter of the lifetimes of s1 and s2. In Rust, this example would be expressed as follows:
pub fn smaller<'a>(s1: &'a String, s2: &'a String) -> &'a String;
Note how the syntax is broadly similar. The main difference is that, unlike in Rust, our proposal does not require lifetimes to be declared.
A lifetime annotation placed after a member function refers to the lifetime of the object the member function is called on:
struct string { // The returned pointer should not outlive ``*this``. const char *[[lifetime(a)]] data() const [[lifetime(a)]]; };
Similar to Rust, [[lifetime(static)]] is used to denote a static lifetime. A common pattern is for a class to have a static function returning a reference to some default value:
class Options final { public: // ... static const Options &[[lifetime(static)]] DefaultOptions(); // ... };
The attribute can be applied to references that appear inside a more complex type expression. For example:
const std::vector<const A *[[lifetime(static)]]> &[[lifetime(static)]] get_static_as();
This expresses that both the reference to the vector and the pointers to the As contained inside it have static lifetimes.
This roughly corresponds to the following in Rust (with the difference that, unlike C++ pointers, Rust references cannot be null):
fn get_static_as() -> &'static CxxVector<&'static A>;
Lifetimes are associated with certain types that we call reference-like types. A reference-like type is one of the following:
The reason that pointers to functions and references to functions do not have lifetimes is to be consistent with Rust, where fn types do not have lifetimes either. In C++, the function that a pointer or reference refers to almost always exists for the duration of the program execution. There are some exceptions, such as functions created by a JIT compiler or functions in plugins loaded and unloaded at runtime. Such functions may be destroyed before the program exits, but we consider them to be unusual enough that we don't support annotating their lifetimes.
Pointers to members don‘t have lifetimes because they aren’t pointers in the narrower sense. A pointer to member doesn't refer to a specific object in memory; rather, it can be used to refer to a specific member of any object of a given type. In implementation terms, a pointer to member is not an address but an offset.
Lifetimes are annotated using the new attribute lifetime[^1]. The attribute takes one or several lifetime names as arguments. Appendix A contains a formal description of the attribute syntax.
For brevity, lifetimes may be implicitly inferred in some situations; this is referred to as lifetime elision, and we describe the specific rules for this later.
There are two lifetime names with special meaning:
static: A lifetime that lasts for the duration of the program.unsafe: A lifetime that cannot otherwise be represented correctly using lifetime annotations. We will discuss the semantics of an unsafe lifetime in more detail below.In addition, there are two types of lifetimes that cannot be named in a lifetime attribute but that are implicitly associated with reference-like types in certain situations:
We call static, unsafe, local, and unknown lifetimes constant lifetimes. We call all other lifetimes variable lifetimes; this reflects the fact that they may be substituted by other lifetimes.
The lifetime attribute can be applied to reference-like types in function signatures, variable declarations (including member variable declarations), alias declarations, and to user-defined reference-like types when referring to static members of such types. The sections below give details on how the attribute can be applied to these constructs and what the semantics are in each case.
Note that, unlike in Rust, lifetimes are not part of the type. For the purposes of C++ semantics (e.g. function overloading), two types that differ only in their lifetime annotations are considered the same type. This is by design: We don’t want to change the semantics of existing code by adding lifetimes, and this is one of the reasons we have chosen to use C++ attributes; the C++ standard allows compilers to ignore attributes they don’t know, which implies that they have no effect on the C++ semantics.
The implementation of a function must be lifetime-correct. This section explains what that means.
Most expressions propagate lifetimes in ways that are straightforward. We will therefore explain lifetime-correctness rules only for those cases that are non-trivial.
Dereferencing a pointer or accessing the value referred to by a reference is lifetime-correct in exactly the following cases:
Dereferencing a pointer with unknown lifetime or accessing the value referred to by a reference with unknown lifetime is not lifetime-correct, but tools should not emit lifetime verification errors in these cases.
operator new returns a pointer with unsafe lifetime. operator delete takes a pointer parameter that has unsafe lifetime.
Initializing or assigning an object of reference-like type with another object is always correct if the lifetimes of the two objects are the same.
In addition, there are a number of cases where it is permissible to initialize or assign an object of reference-like type with another object that has different lifetimes. We call such an operation a lifetime conversion.
To define lifetime correctness of conversions, we first need to define what it means for one lifetime to outlive another:
static lifetime outlives any variable or local lifetime.local1 outlives another local lifetime local2 if the object associated with local1 outlives the object associated with local2 according to C++’s lifetime rules.Note that no variable lifetime a outlives any other variable lifetime b; our annotation scheme does not permit specifying lifetime bounds between lifetimes in the way that Rust does.
Here are the rules for the correctness of lifetime conversions:
T_from *[[lifetime(l_from)]] to type T_to *[[lifetime(l_to)]] is lifetime-correct if and only ifl_from outlives l_to, andT_from and T_to are identical.T_from * const [[lifetime(l_from)]] to type T_to * const [[lifetime(l_to)]] is lifetime-correct if and only ifl_from outlives l_to, andT_from to T_to is lifetime-correct.T with lifetime parameters may not be converted to an object of the same class T but with different lifetime parameters; see also the sections on variance and special member functions.We will describe the lifetime-correctness rules for certain other constructs in the specific sections that deal with those constructs below.
lifetime_cast {#lifetime_cast}To permit building safe abstractions on top of APIs that use unsafe lifetimes, we provide a way to cast unsafe lifetimes to safe lifetimes and vice versa using a function template called lifetime_cast[^2]. A lifetime_cast is similar to C++ cast operations such as const_cast and static_cast but may only be used to change lifetimes.
Obviously, code that uses lifetime_cast must guarantee that the operation is actually lifetime-correct, i.e. that there is no risk of a use-after-free. Like unsafe code in Rust, uses of lifetime_cast should therefore be carefully reviewed and constrained to small parts of the codebase.
lifetime_cast is a function template defined suitably such that the call lifetime_cast<T>(e) evaluates to e and does not perform any copy or move operations. Tools will assume that the lifetimes of the result are those specified in the template argument for T. Apart from lifetime attributes, T must be the same as decltype(e).
A typical use case for lifetime_cast would be building a container such as std::vector on top of raw memory allocation primitives such as operator new. For example, one of the constructors for a vector might look like this:
template <class T> void vector<T>::vector(size_t size) [[lifetime(a)]] : size_(size), capacity_(size), data_(lifetime_cast<T *[[lifetime(a)]]>(new T[size])) {}
Even with lifetime elision, there is a potential concern that the annotations will introduce excessive clutter. A lifetime in Rust typically requires only two characters, e.g. 'a. In contrast, the attribute proposed above, [[lifetime(a)]], requires at least 15 characters, or more if the attribute is scoped inside a namespace.
To reduce verbosity, we suggest providing a macro with a short name that expands to the actual lifetime attribute. The single-character macro name “$” is not in widespread use in many codebases[^3]; a codebase maintainer would obviously want to consider carefully what to use it for, but we think lifetimes could be a worthwhile use. In addition to a general $(lifetime) macro, we could also define lifetime macros $a through $z to allow an even more concise annotation. As an example, this is what the smaller() example from the beginning would look like with this concise syntax:
const std::string &$a smaller( const std::string &$a s1, const std::string &$a s2);
For a more extensive example, see appendix B, which shows what std::string_view would look like with these annotations.
Every codebase can of course define its own macro shortcuts that work within the context of the codebase. A more traditional and still concise macro name would be LT, with additional macros LT_A through LT_Z for concise single-letter lifetimes.
For brevity, in the examples that follow, we will use the $ convention.
As already noted, pointers and references can be annotated with a lifetime, which specifies the lifetime of the object the pointer or reference refers to (the pointee). The lifetime of the pointee must outlive the lifetime of the pointer or reference itself.
For example, let’s look at the example of a double pointer int * $a * $b. The annotation $b on the outer pointer specifies the lifetime of the inner pointer of type int *; the annotation $a on the inner pointer specifies the lifetime of the int. When these lifetime variables are substituted with constant lifetimes, the lifetime substituted for $a must outlive the lifetime substituted for $b. This ensures that the int lives for at least as long as the int * pointer that refers to it.
Lifetime attributes may be placed in the parameter types and return type of a function or function type. In addition, for non-static member functions, a lifetime attribute may be placed after the function declaration to describe the lifetime of the object the member function is called on, i.e. the lifetime of the implicit this parameter.
If a translation unit contains multiple declarations of the same function (including its definition), the lifetime attributes in all declarations must be the same.
As in Rust, a function is considered to be parameterized by the lifetimes that appear in its signature. To express this, a lifetime_param attribute containing the variable lifetime parameters may be placed in front of the function definition, like this:
[[lifetime_param(a)]] int *$a ReturnPtr(int *$a p) { return p; }
However, for brevity, this lifetime_param attribute may and should be left out in most cases. The exception to this is when the signature of the function contains a function type that itself contains lifetimes; in this case, a lifetime_param attribute must be added to disambiguate whether the lifetime should be considered a parameter of the function type or the function. For example:
// Lifetime $a is a parameter of the function type int*(int*). void AddCallback(std::function<int *$a(int *$a) [[lifetime_param(a)]]> f); // Lifetime $a is a parameter of the function AddCallback(). [[lifetime_param(a)]] void AddCallback(std::function<int *$a(int *$a)> f, int *$a p);
Lifetime parameters on function types are analogous to higher-ranked trait bounds in Rust; unlike Rust, however, we only allow this concept in the context of function types, which is where it is typically required.
TODO: Show an example where we're passing a pointer to a local variable into the callback and discuss how this is allowed in the HRTB case but not the other case.
Lifetime-converting a function pointer from to a function pointer to of the same type but with different lifetimes is lifetime-correct if from has either the same lifetimes as to or lifetimes that are more permissive. This means that we must be able to substitute the lifetime parameters of from with lifetime parameters of to such that:
Every parameter of to is lifetime-convertible to the corresponding parameter of from. (Note the direction of the conversion, which is reversed from what one might initially expect. The idea is that from needs to be able to stand in for to, so we need to be able to convert the parameters of to to the parameters of from.[^4])
The return type of from is lifetime-convertible to to.
Similarly, a virtual member function Derived::f that overrides a base class function Base::f must have either the same lifetimes or lifetimes that are more permissive. This means that there we must be able to substitute the lifetime parameters of Derived::f with lifetime parameters of Base::f such that:
Base::f is lifetime-convertible to the corresponding parameter of Derived::f.Derived::f is lifetime-convertible to Base::f.A function call is lifetime-correct if the lifetime parameters of the callee can be substituted by lifetimes from the caller in such a way that converting all arguments to the respective parameter lifetimes is lifetime-correct. If no such substitution can be found, the function call is not lifetime-correct.
Here is an example that illustrates how this works:
void copy_ptr(int *$x from, int *$x *$y to) { *to = from; } int *$a return_ptr(int *$a p) { int* copy; copy_ptr(p, ©); return copy; }
First of all, the copy pointer is inferred to have lifetime $a because it is used in the return statement. Let’s use the name $local1 for the lifetime of the copy variable itself.
Now let’s look at the call to copy_ptr. If we make the substitutions $x = $a and $y = $local1, we see that the lifetimes of the arguments are identical to those of the parameters, so it is trivially correct to lifetime-convert them.
Assume now that return_ptr had been declared with different lifetimes for its parameter and return type:
int *$a return_ptr(int *$b p) { int* copy; copy_ptr(p, ©); // Error, not lifetime-correct. return copy; }
Again, the copy pointer has lifetime $a. If we choose the substitution $x = $a, we can lifetime-convert the second argument but not the first argument (we need an int *$a but we have an int *$b). If we choose $x = $b, we can lifetime-convert the first argument but not the second argument (we need an int *$b * but we have an int *$a *).
Because there is no substitution we can make for $x that allows a lifetime-correct conversion of the arguments of copy_ptr to the respective parameter lifetimes, the call is not lifetime-correct.
As in Rust, to avoid unnecessary annotation clutter, we allow lifetime annotations to be elided (omitted) from a function signature when they conform to certain regular patterns. Lifetime elision is merely a shorthand for these regular lifetime patterns. Elided lifetimes are treated exactly as if they had been spelled out explicitly; in particular, they are subject to lifetime verification, so they are just as safe as explicitly annotated lifetimes.
We adopt the same lifetime elision rules as Rust. We will expand on the rationale for this below, but first let us present the rules.
We call lifetimes on parameters input lifetimes and lifetimes on return values output lifetimes. There are three rules:
this parameter, that lifetime is assigned to all elided output lifetimes.If a function signature contains a function type (in a parameter or the return value), lifetime elision is performed separately for any lifetimes that occur in this function type, independent of the lifetimes in the surrounding function signature. Any elided lifetimes within the function type become lifetime parameters of the function type. See also the discussion of lifetime parameters on function types in this section.
Lifetime elision rules have two requirements:
There is some alignment between these requirements, but some tension too. Working out what the best set of rules is likely requires quite a bit of testing. Instead of doing this, we have for the time being adopted the same set of rules that Rust uses, which presumably have a lot of collective experience embedded in them. The underlying assumption is that Rust and C++ functions do similar things with lifetimes in their interfaces; this assumption seems passable, though surely not perfect. An added benefit of using the Rust rules is that programmers using both languages don't need to keep two sets of rules in their head.
Once we have static analysis tooling that can run on real-world codebases, we may do some tweaking of the lifetime elision rules, but there would need to be clear benefits to justify giving up commonality with Rust.
Introducing lifetimes to a codebase will have to happen incrementally, and this requires some additional considerations. During the transition, there will be some files that have not yet been annotated, and we may indeed decide to exclude some parts of the code base from annotation permanently. Lifetime elision should not be applied to files that have not been annotated or verified for lifetime correctness; instead, the lifetimes should be assumed to be unknown, as described above.
We propose using a pragma or suitable comment string to mark source files where lifetime elision is allowed, e.g.:
#pragma lifetime_elision
Static member variable declarations and non-member variable declarations need not contain lifetime attributes but may do so for clarity.
In general, it may not even be possible to annotate a local variable correctly with the current lifetime annotation syntax. This happens when a local variable may refer to objects of different, unrelated lifetimes. Such a situation is entirely permissible; lifetime inference and verification tools need to deal with this by using a richer internal representation for the lifetimes of local variables.
If a variable has static storage duration, all lifetimes in its type are implicitly assumed to be static. Any manual annotations that are present may only specify the lifetimes static or unsafe.
Taking the address of a static member variable or non-member variable yields a pointer with a lifetime that depends on the variable’s storage duration. If the variable has static storage duration, the pointer has static lifetime. If the variable has automatic storage duration, the pointer has a local lifetime.
A class may be annotated with one or several lifetime parameters by placing the new attribute lifetime_param in the class declaration, and a class annotated in this way is considered to be a reference-like type. All declarations of a class must be annotated with the same lifetime parameters. (See appendix A for a formal description of the attribute syntax.)
When lifetime parameters are substituted with constant lifetime arguments, all of these lifetime arguments must outlive the lifetime of the object they are applied to. This is analogous to the corresponding rule for pointers and references.
Lifetime parameters are necessary when an object of the class contains references to data that has a different lifetime than the object itself; the standard C++ types std::string_view and std::span are examples of this.
The lifetime parameters may be used in the declarations of non-static member functions and non-static member variables of the class.
As an example, here is how parts of std::string_view might be annotated[^5]:
class [[lifetime_param(a)]] string_view { string_view(const char *$a data, size_type len) : ptr_(data), len_(len) {} const char *$a data() const { return ptr_; } string_view $a substr(size_t pos, size_t count) const; private: const char *$a ptr_; size_t len_; };
All reference-like types in the declaration of a non-static member variable must be annotated with the lifetimes static, unsafe, or one of the lifetime parameters of the class.
If a class contains owning pointers to manually allocated memory, these pointers will typically be annotated with an unsafe lifetime. Collection types such as std::vector are examples of this. Member functions that provide access to the owned memory will typically perform a lifetime_cast to the lifetime of the owning object. For example, std::vector::at() has the lifetime signature T& $a std::vector<T>::at(size_type) $a.
A class is not required to use any of its lifetime parameters; it may declare lifetime parameters solely for the purpose of associating a lifetime with objects of the class.
Derived classes inherit the lifetime parameters of their base classes. It is not permissible to add lifetime parameters to a derived class; in other words, all lifetime parameters need to be declared on the base class. If a derived class has multiple base classes, only one of these base classes may declare lifetime parameters.
TODO: Having a derived class “silently” inherit the lifetime parameters of its base classes isn’t great because it doesn't make the lifetime parameters of the derived class visible at the place where it is defined. We should instead consider requiring the lifetime parameters to be re-declared.
The motivation for this rule is to cover the case where a call to a virtual member function in the base class may access member variables of reference-like type in a derived class. A similar situation exists when casting a pointer from the base class to the derived class. In both cases, we want all lifetimes that are relevant to the derived class to be known on the base class.
Special member functions can be annotated with lifetimes just like other member functions, but they deserve special attention because they can be implicitly declared and because they are central to the semantics of C++ value types.
The default constructor and destructor are trivial as they only take a single reference-like parameter, the implicit this parameter, so we will not discuss them further.
The lifetimes in the copy and move operations for a type A without lifetime parameters are as follows (using $s and $o as mnemonics for “self” and “other”):
A(const A& $o) $s; A(A&& $o) $s; A& $s operator=(const A& $o) $s; A& $s operator=(A&& $o) $s;
Conveniently, these are the lifetimes that are implied by lifetime elision, so they would be omitted in practice.
The implication of these lifetimes is that it is possible to move or assign an object of type A to another object with a different lifetime.
The situation is slightly more complicated for a type with lifetime parameters. As an example, consider the following class:
struct [[lifetime_param(p)]] B { int* $p p; };
(The special member functions are implicitly defaulted.)
The lifetimes of the special member functions on B are as follows:
B(const B $p & $o) $s; B(B $p && $o) $s; B& $s operator=(const B $p & $o) $s; B& $s operator=(B $p && $o) $s;
Note that while the lifetimes of the “self” and “other” objects themselves are different, their lifetime parameters are the same. This implies that the copy and move operations cannot extend the lifetime of B::p.
The lifetimes above are not the same as those implied by lifetime elision. Classes with lifetime parameters that use the defaulted copy and move operations need to add explicitly defaulted definitions for these operations.
Alias declarations can declare lifetime parameters in a similar way to classes. These lifetime parameters can then be used on the right-hand side of the alias declaration. In addition, any alias declaration, whether it has lifetime parameters or not, can use the lifetimes static and unsafe on its right-hand side.
If an alias declaration is contained inside a class, its right-hand side may not use any lifetime parameters of that class. This is because, in general, an instance of the alias type has no connection to an instance of the class.
Here is an example for an alias declaration with lifetime parameters, again using std::string_view:
class [[lifetime_param(a)]] string_view { public: // ... using const_iterator [[lifetime_param(i)]] = const char *$i; const_iterator $a begin() const; const_iterator $a end() const; // ... };
Note that the lifetime_param attribute comes after the type alias name, whereas in a class declaration it comes before the class name. This may seem inconsistent, but the placement is dictated by the C++ grammar.
So far, we have pretended that string_view is a class, but it is in fact itself an alias declaration for basic_string_view<char>, and this alias declaration therefore has a lifetime parameter:
template <class T> class [[lifetime_param(a)]] basic_string_view { // ... }; using string_view [[lifetime_param(a)]] = basic_string_view<char> $a;
The interpretation of this is that string_view is a type with a lifetime parameter a, and that this lifetime parameter should be forwarded to the lifetime parameter of basic_string_view<char>.
A function template or class template may be annotated with lifetime attributes and, in the case of class templates, a lifetime_param attribute, just like a non-template function or class.
Explicit template instantiations may not contain lifetime attributes.
Lifetime-correctness of a template may, in general, depend on the template arguments. A template is lifetime-correct if there exists at least one set of arguments for which no specialization exists, that do not result in substitution failure, and for which the specialized template is lifetime-correct.
In general, therefore, lifetimes can only be inferred and verified on a template instantiation. This implies that inference and verification may need to be done multiple times if the same template instantiation is used in multiple translation units. This is slightly unfortunate, but there does not seem to be a good way around it, and it mirrors the fact that such a template instantiation is also compiled multiple times.
To the extent that it is possible to infer and verify lifetimes on the template itself, independent of the template arguments, tooling should do this. In other words, a lifetime-correctness error should be flagged if there is no set of template arguments for which the specialized template is lifetime-correct. Lifetimes should be inferred if they are correct for any template arguments for which no specialization exists and which do not result in a substitution failure.
Partial template specializations should be treated the same way as primary template definitions: Tooling should infer and verify lifetimes on the partial specialization to the extent that this can be done independent of the template arguments.
Full template specializations should be treated the same way as non-template functions and classes: Lifetimes should be inferred and verified on the full template specialization.
When analyzing code that uses a template for which partial or full specializations exist, tooling must of course make sure to refer to the correct specialization.
A function template’s type arguments as well as other dependent types may, in general, be reference-like types. Therefore, when a function template instantiation is used (either by calling it or by taking its address), tooling should do the following:
The lifetimes inferred for the specialized function template should be used when inferring and verifying lifetimes of functions that use the specialized function template.
The type arguments to a class template may be reference-like types. A class template that is specialized with reference-like types in this way is itself considered to be a reference-like type. The specialized class template has a lifetime parameter for each reference-like type that occurs in the template arguments; these lifetime parameters are in addition to any lifetime parameters that are annotated on the class template itself using the lifetime_param attribute. The lifetime parameters associated with a template argument are implicitly propagated to all uses of that argument in the class template.
TODO: Add a discussion of template template arguments
Lifetimes are assigned to a specialized class template’s lifetime arguments as for any other reference-like type, i.e. depending on the context in which the specialized class template is used they may be explicitly annotated, implied by lifetime elision, or inferred. However, there is a syntactical difference: When lifetimes are explicitly annotated, they are placed in the template arguments instead of after the type, as they would be for other lifetime parameters. For example, here a function that takes a vector of pointers and returns an element of the vector:
int* $a get_ith(const std::vector<int* $a>& $b v, size_t i) { return v[i]; }
TODO: Discuss dependent types.
A member function of a specialized class template need not be lifetime-correct for all possible assignments of the lifetime parameters associated with the template arguments.
Instead, we only require that every ODR-use of a member function of a specialized class template is lifetime-correct for the lifetimes assigned to the lifetime parameters for that particular use.
A (slightly contrived) example will help to illustrate why these rules are written the way they are.
template <class From, class To> struct Convert { To convert(From from) { return from; } }; void constify(int* [[lifetime(a)]] p, const int *[[lifetime(a)]] *[[lifetime(b)]] pp) { Convert<int*, const int*> c; *pp = c.convert(p); }
The specialized class template Convert<int*, const int*> has two lifetime parameters: one lifetime parameter (which we will call x) for the int* template argument, and one lifetime parameter (which we will call y) for the const int* template argument.
The Convert::convert() member function is not lifetime-correct if we consider x and y to be arbitrary variable lifetimes, as it is not lifetime-correct to lifetime-convert an int *with lifetime x to a const int * with lifetime y.
However, for the use of Convert in the declaration of c, we infer that both x and y should be substituted by the lifetime a. Convert::convert() is lifetime-correct when x and y are substituted in this way.
TODO: Do we need to make this distinction between lifetime parameters and the lifetimes they are substituted with, or can we make the substitution directly?
As in Rust, we need to establish some variance rules for type and lifetime parameters, but the specific rules differ slightly from Rust.
const T & and const T * are covariant with respect to T.T & and T * are invariant with respect to T.The last two rules differ from Rust, which infers the variance of type and lifetime parameters on user-defined types. Unlike Rust generics, C++ class templates are invariant with respect to their type parameters[^6], and we want to be consistent with this.
Regarding lifetime parameters on types, we restrict ourselves to invariance for simplicity. Rust infers the variance of lifetime parameters from the way they are used in the definition of the type, but in C++, this is impossible to do, at least on a single-translation-unit basis, as a lifetime-parameterized class may only be forward-declared in the current translation unit. For simplicity, and consistency with template parameters, we have therefore decided that lifetime parameters will always be invariant, as we expect this to be sufficient in practice. If this turns out to be too limiting, we may need to provide a way of annotating the variance of lifetime parameters.
[[clang::lifetimebound]]Clang already provides a limited ability to annotate lifetimes with the [[clang::lifetimebound]] attribute[^7]. Quoting from the documentation:
The
lifetimeboundattribute on a function parameter or implicit object parameter indicates that objects that are referred to by that parameter may also be referred to by the return value of the annotated function (or, for a parameter of a constructor, by the value of the constructed object).
If the lifetime annotation is applied to aggregates (arrays and simple structs), those aggregates are considered to refer to any pointers or references transitively contained within them.
Here, again, is the smaller() example, but annotated with [[clang::lifetimebound]]:
const std::string& smaller( const std::string& s1 [[clang::lifetimebound]], const std::string& s2 [[clang::lifetimebound]]);
The attribute may also be applied to a member function to indicate that the lifetime of the return value corresponds to the lifetime of the object. Here is an example from the [[clang::lifetimebound]] documentation:
struct string { // The returned pointer should not outlive ``*this``. const char *data() const [[clang::lifetimebound]]; };
This is an example of the very common case where a member function returns a pointer or reference to part of the object, or to another object owned by it.
The [[clang::lifetimebound]] attribute provides a way to express lifetimes in many common scenarios, but it does have its limitations:
There is no way to differentiate between different lifetimes.
There is no way to annotate a static lifetime.
The attribute attaches to function parameters and always implicitly refers to the outermost reference-like type[^8]; it is not possible to attach it to part of a type (e.g. to the T * in a const std::vector<T *> &).
The single lifetime is implicitly applied to the outermost reference-like type in the function’s return type (or the value of the constructed object, in the case of a constructor). Again, it is not possible to associate the lifetime with inner reference types in the return value (e.g. the T * in const std::vector<T *> &).
The lifetime of a constructor parameter can be associated with the lifetime of the object being constructed, i.e. with the lifetime of the this pointer, but this isn’t possible in other member functions. In other words, a member function cannot associate the lifetime of a parameter with the lifetime of the object the member function is called on.
There is no way to add a lifetime parameter to a struct.
-Wdangling-gslThe WG21 proposal P1179 describes a static analysis that aims to prevent many common types of use-after-free. It uses an attribute-based annotation scheme to describe the lifetime contracts of functions and to annotate user-defined types containing indirections.
Preliminary implementations of this scheme exist in MSVC and a fork of Clang. In addition, Clang trunk implements statement-local warnings inspired by the scheme, which are enabled by the on-by-default flag -Wdangling-gsl.
The scheme has both advantages and disadvantages compared to the scheme proposed here:
std::swap(ptr1, ptr2), where the lifetimes of the pointers after the call are swapped compared to before the call.int *$a return_first(const vector<int *$a> &$b v);We believe the limitations of this scheme will restrict its usefulness in the use cases we are interested in. A more in-depth comparison of P1179 with our proposed scheme can be found here.
This appendix describes where lifetime attributes may appear and what arguments they can take.
We are currently still experimenting with the exact syntax and semantics for the lifetime annotations. While we are doing so, we will use the general-purpose annotate and annotate_type attributes as stand-ins for the new attributes proposed below.
We introduce two new attributes, lifetime and lifetime_param. In practice, these would be scoped to a namespace (probably clang), but for ease of exposition, we assume they are in the global namespace.
lifetime_param {#attribute-lifetime_param}This attribute may be applied to the following:
The attribute takes one or more arguments. Each of these arguments must be an identifier[^9]; each argument defines a lifetime parameter for the corresponding class.
If the class definition or alias declaration is nested within a class that itself has a lifetime_param attribute, none of the lifetime parameter names of the outer class may be used as lifetime parameter names on the nested class definition or alias declaration.
lifetimeThis attribute may be applied to the following:
The attribute takes one or more arguments, each of which must be an identifier or the keyword static. We call these identifiers lifetime names.
In addition, the following constraints apply:
When the lifetime attribute is applied to a type, the type must be a class type or alias declaration whose definition contains a lifetime_param attribute.
The lifetime attribute must have the same number of arguments as the lifetime_param attribute on the corresponding class or alias declaration. (These arguments define lifetime parameters for the object instance.)
When the lifetime attribute is applied to a pointer operator, it must take exactly one argument. (This defines a lifetime for the object referenced by the pointer operator.).
When the lifetime attribute is applied to a non-static member function declaration, it must take exactly one argument. (This defines a lifetime for the implicit object parameter).
Every lifetime name that appears in a function’s return value must either be static or also appear either in
lifetime attribute for the implicit object parameter (in the case of a non-static member function), orlifetime_param attribute of the class (in the case of a non-static member function).For every constructor of a class that has a lifetime_param attribute, every lifetime name that appears in the lifetime_param attribute must appear in the constructor’s parameter list.
Every lifetime name that appears in a non-static member variable declaration must either be static or one of the lifetime parameters declared in a lifetime_param attribute on the class containing the member variable declaration.
Every lifetime name that appears in the defining-type-id of an alias declaration must either be static or one of the lifetime parameters declared in a lifetime_param attribute on the alias declaration. Note that if the alias declaration is nested within a class that also has lifetime parameters, those lifetime parameters may not appear in the defining-type-id of the alias declaration.
To illustrate how lifetime annotations work on a larger code sample, here is an annotated version of interesting parts of std::string_view. To keep the code clear, we have omitted basic_string_view and simply stamped out string_view for the template arguments used in its definition.
// Lifetime "s" is mnemonic for "lifetime parameter of string_view" class LIFETIME_PARAM(s) string_view { public: using const_pointer LIFETIME_PARAM(iter_lifetime) = const char *$(iter_lifetime); using const_reference LIFETIME_PARAM(iter_lifetime) = const char &$(iter_lifetime); using const_iterator LIFETIME_PARAM(iter_lifetime) = const char *$(iter_lifetime); using iterator LIFETIME_PARAM(iter_lifetime) = const_iterator $(iter_lifetime); using const_reverse_iterator LIFETIME_PARAM(iter_lifetime) = std::reverse_iterator<const_iterator $(iter_lifetime)>; using reverse_iterator LIFETIME_PARAM(iter_lifetime) = const_reverse_iterator $(iter_lifetime); using size_type = size_t; static constexpr size_type npos = static_cast<size_type>(-1); constexpr string_view() noexcept; constexpr string_view(const string_view $s & other) noexcept = default; constexpr string_view(const char* $s data, size_type len); constexpr const_iterator $s begin() const noexcept; constexpr const_iterator $s end() const noexcept; constexpr const_reverse_iterator $s rbegin() const noexcept; constexpr const_reverse_iterator $s rend() const noexcept; constexpr const_reference $s front() const; constexpr const_reference $s back() const; constexpr const_pointer $s data() const noexcept; constexpr const_reference $s operator[](size_type i) const; constexpr const_reference $s at(size_type i) const; // The annotation cannot express that the lifetime parameter of `this` and // `other` are swapped after the call, so we have to be overly restrictive and // require `this` and `other` to have the same lifetime parameter. constexpr void swap(string_view $s & other) noexcept; // Output buffer may have a different lifetime than this string view's data. size_type copy(char* buf, size_type n, size_type pos = 0) const; // Returned substring has the same lifetime parameter as this `string_view`. constexpr string_view $s substr(size_type pos = 0, size_type n = npos) const; // `string_view` to compare against does not need to share the same lifetime. constexpr int compare(string_view x) const noexcept; private: const char* $s ptr_; size_type length_; };
[^1]: The attribute will be scoped to some suitable namespace, but for ease of exposition we assume here that it is placed in the global namespace. [^2]: lifetime_cast will be placed in a suitable namespace, but for ease of exposition, we assume here that it is in the global namespace. [^3]: “$” is not part of the standard set of characters allowed in C++ identifiers (including macro names), but the C++ standard permits implementations to allow additional implementation-defined characters, and gcc, Clang, and MSVC allow $ as an implementation-defined character. [^4]: More formally, this is because function types are contravariant in their parameter types. [^5]: For simplicity, we are showing std::string_view as if it was a non-template type. [^6]: Unless converting constructors and conversion constructors are used to simulate variance. [^7]: This attribute is inspired by the C++ Standards Committee paper P0936R0. [^8]: Quoting Richard Smith: "The Clang attribute behaves as if each type has exactly one associated lifetime, and the attribute says in which cases the outermost lifetime of a parameter matches the outermost lifetime of the return value.” [^9]: Note that this automatically disallows the special lifetime name static, which is allowed in lifetime attributes. We make no other constraints on identifiers, but codebases that want to use the lifetime annotations for C++ / Rust interop may want to enforce a rule that prohibits invalid Rust identifiers (e.g. Rust keywords) in the lifetime_param and lifetime attributes..