I am building up a library for generating the minimum perfect hash from a set of keys. The idea is to index the keys online without storing the full dataset in memory. Based on a user requirement, it is possible that skip_next()
is not available and I want to fall back to using next()
. Although it might be slower based on the speed of the iterator, it simplifies things for a general user.
My idea is to selectively iterate over all the elements generated by an iterator. This code works fine, but it requires a user to implement the trait FastIteration
:
#[derive(Debug)]
struct Pixel {
r: Vec<i8>,
g: Vec<i8>,
b: Vec<i8>,
}
#[derive(Debug)]
struct Node {
r: i8,
g: i8,
b: i8,
}
struct PixelIterator<'a> {
pixel: &'a Pixel,
index: usize,
}
impl<'a> IntoIterator for &'a Pixel {
type Item = Node;
type IntoIter = PixelIterator<'a>;
fn into_iter(self) -> Self::IntoIter {
println!("Into &");
PixelIterator {
pixel: self,
index: 0,
}
}
}
impl<'a> Iterator for PixelIterator<'a> {
type Item = Node;
fn next(&mut self) -> Option<Node> {
println!("next &");
let result = match self.index {
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 => Node {
r: self.pixel.r[self.index],
g: self.pixel.g[self.index],
b: self.pixel.b[self.index],
},
_ => return None,
};
self.index += 1;
Some(result)
}
}
trait FastIteration {
fn skip_next(&mut self);
}
impl<'a> FastIteration for PixelIterator<'a> {
fn skip_next(&mut self) {
self.index += 1;
}
}
fn main() {
let p1 = Pixel {
r: vec![11, 21, 31, 41],
g: vec![12, 22, 32, 42],
b: vec![13, 23, 33, 43],
};
let mut index = 0;
let mut it = p1.into_iter();
loop {
if index == p1.r.len() {
break;
}
if index == 1 {
it.skip_next()
} else {
let val = it.next();
println!("{:?}", val);
}
index += 1;
}
}
How can one make the above program fall back to using the normal next()
instead of skip_next()
based on if the trait FastIteration
is implemented or not?
fn fast_iterate<I>(objects: I)
where I: IntoIter + FastIteration { // should use skip_next() };
fn slow_iterate<I>(objects: I)
where I: IntoIter { // should NOT use skip_next(), use next() };
As above, one can always write two separate impl
but is it possible to do this in one?
This question builds on: