Why bother writing similar code twice for blocking and async code?
When implementing both sync and async versions of API in a crate, most API of the two version are almost the same except for some async/await keyword.
maybe-async
help unifying async and sync implementation by procedural
macro.
- Write async code with normal async
, await
, and let maybe_async
handles
those async
and await
when you need a blocking code.
- Switch between sync and async by toggling is_sync
feature gate in
Cargo.toml
.
- use must_be_async
and must_be_sync
to keep code in specified version
- use impl_async
and impl_sync
to only compile code block on specified
version
- A handy macro to unify unit test code is also provided.
These procedural macros can be applied to the following codes: - trait item declaration - trait implmentation - function definition - struct definition
RECOMMENDATION: Enable resolver ver2 in your crate, which is introduced in Rust 1.51. If not, two crates in dependency with conflict version (one async and another blocking) can fail complilation.
The async/await language feature alters the async world of rust. Comparing with the map/and_then style, now the async code really resembles sync version code.
In many crates, the async and sync version of crates shares the same API, but the minor difference that all async code must be awaited prevent the unification of async and sync code. In other words, we are forced to write an async and an sync implementation repectively.
maybe-async
offers 4 set of attribute macros: maybe_async
,
sync_impl
/async_impl
, must_be_sync
/must_be_async
, and test
.
To use maybe-async
, we must know which block of codes is only used on
blocking implementation, and which on async. These two implementation should
share the same function signatures except for async/await keywords, and use
sync_impl
and async_impl
to mark these implementation.
Use maybe_async
macro on codes that share the same API on both async and
blocking code except for async/await keywords. And use feature gate
is_sync
in Cargo.toml
to toggle between async and blocking code.
maybe_async
Offers a unified feature gate to provide sync and async conversion on
demand by feature gate is_sync
, with async first policy.
Want to keep async code? add maybe_async
in dependencies with default
features, which means maybe_async
is the same as must_be_async
:
toml
[dependencies]
maybe_async = "0.2"
Wanna convert async code to sync? Add maybe_async
to dependencies with
an is_sync
feature gate. In this way, maybe_async
is the same as
must_be_sync
:
toml
[dependencies]
maybe_async = { version = "0.2", features = ["is_sync"] }
Not all async traits need futures that are dyn Future + Send
.
To avoid having "Send" and "Sync" bounds placed on the async trait
methods, invoke the maybeasync macro as #[maybeasync(?Send)] on both
the trait and the impl blocks.
must_be_async
Keep async. Add async_trait
attribute macro for trait declaration
or implementation to bring async fn support in traits.
To avoid having "Send" and "Sync" bounds placed on the async trait methods, invoke the maybeasync macro as #[mustbe_async(?Send)].
must_be_sync
Convert to sync code. Convert the async code into sync code by
removing all async move
, async
and await
keyword
sync_impl
An sync implementation should on compile on blocking implementation and must simply disappear when we want async version.
Although most of the API are almost the same, there definitely come to a point when the async and sync version should differ greatly. For example, a MongoDB client may use the same API for async and sync verison, but the code to actually send reqeust are quite different.
Here, we can use sync_impl
to mark a synchronous implementation, and a
sync implementation shoule disappear when we want async version.
async_impl
An async implementation should on compile on async implementation and must simply disappear when we want sync version.
To avoid having "Send" and "Sync" bounds placed on the async trait methods, invoke the maybeasync macro as #[asyncimpl(?Send)].
test
Handy macro to unify async and sync unit and e2e test code.
You can specify the condition to compile to sync test code
and also the conditions to compile to async test code with given test
macro, e.x. tokio::test
, async_std::test
and etc. When only sync
condition is specified,the test code only compiles when sync condition
is met.
```rust
feature="is_sync",
async(all(not(feature="is_sync"), feature="async_std"), async_std::test),
async(all(not(feature="is_sync"), feature="tokio"), tokio::test)
)] async fn testasyncfn() { let res = asyncfn().await; asserteq!(res, true); } ```
maybe-async
compiles your code in different way with the is_sync
feature
gate. It remove all await
and async
keywords in your code under
maybe_async
macro and conditionally compiles codes under async_impl
and
sync_impl
.
Here is an detailed example on what's going on whe the is_sync
feature
gate set or not.
```rust
trait A { async fn asyncfnname() -> Result<(), ()> { Ok(()) } fn syncfnname() -> Result<(), ()> { Ok(()) } }
struct Foo;
impl A for Foo { async fn asyncfnname() -> Result<(), ()> { Ok(()) } fn syncfnname() -> Result<(), ()> { Ok(()) } }
async fn maybeasyncfn() -> Result<(), ()> { let a = Foo::asyncfnname().await?;
let b = Foo::sync_fn_name()?;
Ok(())
} ```
When maybe-async
feature gate is_sync
is NOT set, the generated code
is async code:
``rust
// Compiled code when
is_sync` is toggled off.
trait A { async fn maybeasyncfnname() -> Result<(), ()> { Ok(()) } fn syncfn_name() -> Result<(), ()> { Ok(()) } }
struct Foo;
impl A for Foo { async fn maybeasyncfnname() -> Result<(), ()> { Ok(()) } fn syncfn_name() -> Result<(), ()> { Ok(()) } }
async fn maybeasyncfn() -> Result<(), ()> { let a = Foo::maybeasyncfnname().await?; let b = Foo::syncfn_name()?; Ok(()) } ```
When maybe-async
feature gate is_sync
is set, all async keyword is
ignored and yields a sync version code:
``rust
// Compiled code when
issync` is toggled on.
trait A {
fn maybeasyncfnname() -> Result<(), ()> {
Ok(())
}
fn syncfnname() -> Result<(), ()> {
Ok(())
}
}
struct Foo;
impl A for Foo { fn maybeasyncfnname() -> Result<(), ()> { Ok(()) } fn syncfn_name() -> Result<(), ()> { Ok(()) } }
fn maybeasyncfn() -> Result<(), ()> { let a = Foo::maybeasyncfnname()?; let b = Foo::syncfn_name()?; Ok(()) } ```
When implementing rust client for any services, like awz3. The higher level API of async and sync version is almost the same, such as creating or deleting a bucket, retrieving an object and etc.
The example service_client
is a proof of concept that maybe_async
can
actually free us from writing almost the same code for sync and async. We
can toggle between a sync AWZ3 client and async one by is_sync
feature
gate when we add maybe-async
to dependency.
MIT