Inventing the Service trait
May 17, 2021
Tower is a library of modular and reusable components for building robust
networking clients and servers. At its core is the Service
trait. A
Service
is an asynchronous function that takes a request and produces a
response. However, some aspects of its design may not be immediately obvious.
Rather than explaining the Service
trait as it exists in Tower today, let's
look at the motivation behind Service
by imagining how you might invent it if
you started from scratch.
Imagine you are building a little HTTP framework in Rust. The framework would allow users to implement an HTTP server by supplying code that receives requests and replies with some response.
You might have an API like this:
// Create a server that listens on port 3000
let server = Server::new("127.0.0.1:3000").await?;
// Somehow run the user's application
server.run(the_users_application).await?;
The question is, what should the_users_application
be?
The simplest thing that just might work is:
fn handle_request(request: HttpRequest) -> HttpResponse {
// ...
}
Where HttpRequest
and HttpResponse
are some structs provided by our framework.
With this, we can implement Server::run
like so:
impl Server {
async fn run<F>(self, handler: F) -> Result<(), Error>
where
F: Fn(HttpRequest) -> HttpResponse,
{
let listener = TcpListener::bind(self.addr).await?;
loop {
let mut connection = listener.accept().await?;
let request = read_http_request(&mut connection).await?;
task::spawn(async move {
// Call the handler provided by the user
let response = handler(request);
write_http_response(connection, response).await?;
});
}
}
}
Here, we have an asynchronous function run
which takes a closure that accepts an
HttpRequest
and returns an HttpResponse
.
That means users can use our Server
like so:
fn handle_request(request: HttpRequest) -> HttpResponse {
if request.path() == "/" {
HttpResponse::ok("Hello, World!")
} else {
HttpResponse::not_found()
}
}
// Run the server and handle requests using our `handle_request` function
server.run(handle_request).await?;
This is not bad. It makes it easy for users to run HTTP servers without worrying about any of the low level details.
However, our current design has one issue: we cannot handle requests asynchronously. Imagine our user needs to query a database or send a request to some other server while handling the request. Currently, that would require blocking while we wait for the handler to produce a response. If we want our server to be able to handle a large number of concurrent connections, we need to be able to serve other requests while we wait for that request to complete asynchronously. Let's fix this by having the handler function return a future:
impl Server {
async fn run<F, Fut>(self, handler: F) -> Result<(), Error>
where
// `handler` now returns a generic type `Fut`...
F: Fn(HttpRequest) -> Fut,
// ...which is a `Future` whose `Output` is an `HttpResponse`
Fut: Future<Output = HttpResponse>,
{
let listener = TcpListener::bind(self.addr).await?;
loop {
let mut connection = listener.accept().await?;
let request = read_http_request(&mut connection).await?;
task::spawn(async move {
// Await the future returned by `handler`
let response = handler(request).await;
write_http_response(connection, response).await?;
});
}
}
}
Using this API is very similar to before:
// Now an async function
async fn handle_request(request: HttpRequest) -> HttpResponse {
if request.path() == "/" {
HttpResponse::ok("Hello, World!")
} else if request.path() == "/important-data" {
// We can now do async stuff in here
let some_data = fetch_data_from_database().await;
make_response(some_data)
} else {
HttpResponse::not_found()
}
}
// Running the server is the same
server.run(handle_request).await?;
This is much nicer, since our request handling can now call other async
functions. However, there is still something missing. What if our handler
encounters an error and cannot produce a response? Let's make it return a
Result
:
impl Server {
async fn run<F, Fut>(self, handler: F) -> Result<(), Error>
where
F: Fn(HttpRequest) -> Fut,
// The response future is now allowed to fail
Fut: Future<Output = Result<HttpResponse, Error>>,
{
let listener = TcpListener::bind(self.addr).await?;
loop {
let mut connection = listener.accept().await?;
let request = read_http_request(&mut connection).await?;
task::spawn(async move {
// Pattern match on the result of the response future
match handler(request).await {
Ok(response) => write_http_response(connection, response).await?,
Err(error) => handle_error_somehow(error, connection),
}
});
}
}
}
Adding more behavior
Now, suppose we want to ensure that all requests complete in a timely manner
or fail, rather than keeping the client waiting indefinitely for a response that
may never arrive. We can do this by adding a timeout to each request. A
timeout sets a limit on the maximum duration the handler
is allowed to take.
If it doesn't produce a response within that amount of time, an error is returned.
This allows the client to retry that request or report an error to the user, rather
than waiting forever.
Your first idea might be to modify Server
so that it can be configured with a timeout.
It would then apply that timeout every time it calls handler
. However, it turns out
you can actually add a timeout without modifying Server
. Using
tokio::time::timeout
, we can make a new handler function that calls our
previous handle_request
, but with a timeout of 30 seconds:
async fn handler_with_timeout(request: HttpRequest) -> Result<HttpResponse, Error> {
let result = tokio::time::timeout(
Duration::from_secs(30),
handle_request(request)
).await;
match result {
Ok(Ok(response)) => Ok(response),
Ok(Err(error)) => Err(error),
Err(_timeout_elapsed) => Err(Error::timeout()),
}
}
This provides a quite nice separation of concerns. We were able to add a timeout without changing any of our existing code.
Let's add one more feature in this way. Imagine we're building a JSON API and
would therefore like a Content-Type: application/json
header on all responses.
We can wrap handler_with_timeout
in a similar way, and modify the response like
so:
async fn handler_with_timeout_and_content_type(
request: HttpRequest,
) -> Result<HttpResponse, Error> {
let mut response = handler_with_timeout(request).await?;
response.set_header("Content-Type", "application/json");
Ok(response)
}
We now have a handler that will process an HTTP request, take no longer than 30
seconds, and always have the right Content-Type
header, all without modifying
our original handle_request
function or Server
struct.
Designing libraries that can be extended in this way is very powerful, since it allows users to extend the library's functionality by layering in new behavior, without having to wait for the library maintainers to add support for it.
It also makes testing easier, since you can break your code into small isolated units and write fine-grained tests for them, without worrying about all the other pieces.
However, there is one problem. Our current design lets us compose new
behavior by wrapping a handler function in a new handler function that
implements the behavior and then calls the inner function. This works, but
it doesn't scale very well if we want to add lots of additional functionality.
Imagine we have many handle_with_*
functions that each add a little bit
new of behavior. Having to hard-code the chain of which intermediate handler
calls which will become challenging. Our current chain is
handler_with_timeout_and_content_type
which callshandler_with_timeout
which callshandle_request
which actually processes the request
It would be nice if we could somehow compose these three functions without having to hard-code the exact order. Something like:
let final_handler = with_content_type(with_timeout(handle_request));
While still being able to run our handler like before:
server.run(final_handler).await?;
You could try and implement with_content_type
and with_timeout
as functions
that took an argument of type F: Fn(HttpRequest) -> Future<Output = Result<HttpResponse, Error>>
and returned a closure like impl Fn(HttpRequest) -> impl Future<Output = Result<HttpResponse, Error>>
but that actually isn't
possible due to limitations in where Rust allows impl Trait
today.
Specifically impl Fn() -> impl Future
is not allowed. Using Box
would be
possible but that has a performance cost we would like to avoid.
You also wouldn't be able to add other behavior to your handlers besides calling them but why that's necessary is something we'll get back to.
The Handler
trait
Let's try another approach. Rather than Server::run
accepting a closure
(Fn(HttpRequest) -> ...
), let's make a new trait that encapsulates the same async fn(HttpRequest) -> Result<HttpResponse, Error>
:
trait Handler {
async fn call(&mut self, request: HttpRequest) -> Result<HttpResponse, Error>;
}
Having a trait like this allows us to write concrete types that implement it, so
we don't have to deal with Fn
s all the time.
However, Rust currently doesn't support async trait methods, so we have two options:
- Make
call
return a boxed future likePin<Box<dyn Future<Output = Result<HttpResponse, Error>>>
. This is what the async-trait crate does. - Add an associated
type Future
toHandler
so users get to pick their own type.
Let's go with option two, as it's the most flexible. Users who have a concrete future
type can use that without the cost of a Box
, and users who don't care can still
use Pin<Box<...>>
.
trait Handler {
type Future: Future<Output = Result<HttpResponse, Error>>;
fn call(&mut self, request: HttpRequest) -> Self::Future;
}
We still have to require that Handler::Future
implements Future
with the
output type Result<HttpResponse, Error>
, as that is what Server::run
requires.
Having call
take &mut self
is useful because it allows handlers to update
their internal state if necessary1.
Let's convert our original handle_request
function into an implementation of
this trait:
struct RequestHandler;
impl Handler for RequestHandler {
// We use `Pin<Box<...>>` here for simplicity, but could also define our
// own `Future` type to avoid the overhead
type Future = Pin<Box<dyn Future<Output = Result<HttpResponse, Error>>>>;
fn call(&mut self, request: HttpRequest) -> Self::Future {
Box::pin(async move {
// same implementation as we had before
if request.path() == "/" {
Ok(HttpResponse::ok("Hello, World!"))
} else if request.path() == "/important-data" {
let some_data = fetch_data_from_database().await?;
Ok(make_response(some_data))
} else {
Ok(HttpResponse::not_found())
}
})
}
}
How about supporting timeouts? Remember, the solution we're aiming for is one that allows us to combine different pieces of functionality together without having to modify each individual piece.
What if we defined a generic Timeout
struct like this:
struct Timeout<T> {
// T will be some type that implements `Handler`
inner_handler: T,
duration: Duration,
}
We could then implement Handler
for Timeout<T>
and delegate to T
's
Handler
implementation:
impl<T> Handler for Timeout<T>
where
T: Handler,
{
type Future = Pin<Box<dyn Future<Output = Result<HttpResponse, Error>>>>;
fn call(&mut self, request: HttpRequest) -> Self::Future {
Box::pin(async move {
let result = tokio::time::timeout(
self.duration,
self.inner_handler.call(request),
).await;
match result {
Ok(Ok(response)) => Ok(response),
Ok(Err(error)) => Err(error),
Err(_timeout) => Err(Error::timeout()),
}
})
}
}
The important line here is self.inner_handler.call(request)
. This is where we
delegate to the inner handler and let it do its thing. We don't know what it is,
we just know that it produces a Result<HttpResponse, Error>
when its done.
This code doesn't quite compile though. We get an error like this:
error[E0759]: `self` has an anonymous lifetime `'_` but it needs to satisfy a `'static` lifetime requirement
--> src/lib.rs:145:29
|
144 | fn call(&mut self, request: HttpRequest) -> Self::Future {
| --------- this data with an anonymous lifetime `'_`...
145 | Box::pin(async move {
| _____________________________^
146 | | let result = tokio::time::timeout(
147 | | self.duration,
148 | | self.inner_handler.call(request),
... |
155 | | }
156 | | })
| |_________^ ...is captured here, requiring it to live as long as `'static`
The issue is that we're capturing a &mut self
and moving it into an async
block. That means the lifetime of our future is tied to the lifetime of &mut self
. This doesn't work for us, since we might want to run our response futures
on multiple threads to get better performance, or produce multiple response
futures and run them all in parallel. That isn't possible if a reference to the
handler lives inside the futures2.
Instead we need to convert the &mut self
into an owned self
. That is exactly
what Clone
does:
// this must be `Clone` for `Timeout<T>` to be `Clone`
#[derive(Clone)]
struct RequestHandler;
impl Handler for RequestHandler {
// ...
}
#[derive(Clone)]
struct Timeout<T> {
inner_handler: T,
duration: Duration,
}
impl<T> Handler for Timeout<T>
where
T: Handler + Clone,
{
type Future = Pin<Box<dyn Future<Output = Result<HttpResponse, Error>>>>;
fn call(&mut self, request: HttpRequest) -> Self::Future {
// Get an owned clone of `&mut self`
let mut this = self.clone();
Box::pin(async move {
let result = tokio::time::timeout(
this.duration,
this.inner_handler.call(request),
).await;
match result {
Ok(Ok(response)) => Ok(response),
Ok(Err(error)) => Err(error),
Err(_timeout) => Err(Error::timeout()),
}
})
}
}
Note that cloning is very cheap in this case, since RequestHandler
doesn't have
any data and Timeout<T>
only adds a Duration
(which is Copy
).
One step closer. We now get a different error:
error[E0310]: the parameter type `T` may not live long enough
--> src/lib.rs:149:9
|
140 | impl<T> Handler for Timeout<T>
| - help: consider adding an explicit lifetime bound...: `T: 'static`
...
149 | / Box::pin(async move {
150 | | let result = tokio::time::timeout(
151 | | this.duration,
152 | | this.inner_handler.call(request),
... |
159 | | }
160 | | })
| |__________^ ...so that the type `impl Future` will meet its required lifetime bounds
The problem now is that T
can be any type whatsoever. It can even be a type
that contains references, like Vec<&'a str>
. However that won't work for the
same reason as before. We need the response future to have a 'static
lifetime
so we can more easily pass it around.
The compiler actually tells us what the fix is. Add T: 'static
:
impl<T> Handler for Timeout<T>
where
T: Handler + Clone + 'static,
{
// ...
}
The response future now satisfies the 'static
lifetime requirement, since it
doesn't contain references (and any references T
contains are 'static
). Now,
our code compiles!
Let's create a similar handler struct for adding a Content-Type
header on the
response:
#[derive(Clone)]
struct JsonContentType<T> {
inner_handler: T,
}
impl<T> Handler for JsonContentType<T>
where
T: Handler + Clone + 'static,
{
type Future = Pin<Box<dyn Future<Output = Result<HttpResponse, Error>>>>;
fn call(&mut self, request: HttpRequest) -> Self::Future {
let mut this = self.clone();
Box::pin(async move {
let mut response = this.inner_handler.call(request).await?;
response.set_header("Content-Type", "application/json");
Ok(response)
})
}
}
Notice this follows a very similar pattern to Timeout
.
Next up we modify Server::run
to accept our new Handler
trait:
impl Server {
async fn run<T>(self, mut handler: T) -> Result<(), Error>
where
T: Handler,
{
let listener = TcpListener::bind(self.addr).await?;
loop {
let mut connection = listener.accept().await?;
let request = read_http_request(&mut connection).await?;
task::spawn(async move {
// have to call `Handler::call` here
match handler.call(request).await {
Ok(response) => write_http_response(connection, response).await?,
Err(error) => handle_error_somehow(error, connection),
}
});
}
}
}
We can now compose our three handlers together:
JsonContentType {
inner_handler: Timeout {
inner_handler: RequestHandler,
duration: Duration::from_secs(30),
},
}
And if we add some new
methods to our types, they become a little easier to
compose:
let handler = RequestHandler;
let handler = Timeout::new(handler, Duration::from_secs(30));
let handler = JsonContentType::new(handler);
// `handler` has type `JsonContentType<Timeout<RequestHandler>>`
server.run(handler).await
This works quite well! We're now able to layer on additional functionality to
RequestHandler
without having to modify its implementation. In theory, we could
put our JsonContentType
and Timeout
handlers into a crate and release it as
library on crates.io for other people to use!
Making Handler
more flexible
Our little Handler
trait is working quite nicely, but currently it only
supports our HttpRequest
and HttpResponse
types. It would be nice if those
were generic, so users could use whatever type they want.
We make the request a generic type parameter of the trait so that a given service can accept many different types of requests. That allows defining handlers that can be used for different protocols instead of only HTTP. We make response an associated type because for any given request type, there can only be one (associated) response type: the one the corresponding call returns!
trait Handler<Request> {
type Response;
// Error should also be an associated type. No reason for that to be a
// hardcoded type
type Error;
// Our future type from before, but now it's output must use
// the associated `Response` and `Error` types
type Future: Future<Output = Result<Self::Response, Self::Error>>;
// `call` is unchanged, but note that `Request` here is our generic
// `Request` type parameter and not the `HttpRequest` type we've used
// until now
fn call(&mut self, request: Request) -> Self::Future;
}
Our implementation for RequestHandler
now becomes
impl Handler<HttpRequest> for RequestHandler {
type Response = HttpResponse;
type Error = Error;
type Future = Pin<Box<dyn Future<Output = Result<HttpResponse, Error>>>>;
fn call(&mut self, request: Request) -> Self::Future {
// same as before
}
}
Timeout<T>
is a bit different. Since it wraps some other Handler
and adds an
async timeout, it actually doesn't care about what the request or response types
are, as long as the Handler
it is wrapping uses the same types.
The Error
type is a bit different. Since tokio::time::timeout
returns
Result<T, tokio::time::error::Elapsed>
, we must be able to convert a
tokio::time::error::Elapsed
into the inner Handler
's error type.
If we put all those things together we get
// `Timeout` accepts any request of type `R` as long as `T`
// accepts the same type of request
impl<R, T> Handler<R> for Timeout<T>
where
// The actual type of request must not contain
// references. The compiler would tell us to add
// this if we didn't
R: 'static,
// `T` must accept requests of type `R`
T: Handler<R> + Clone + 'static,
// We must be able to convert an `Elapsed` into
// `T`'s error type
T::Error: From<tokio::time::error::Elapsed>,
{
// Our response type is the same as `T`'s, since we
// don't have to modify it
type Response = T::Response;
// Error type is also the same
type Error = T::Error;
// Future must output a `Result` with the correct types
type Future = Pin<Box<dyn Future<Output = Result<T::Response, T::Error>>>>;
fn call(&mut self, request: R) -> Self::Future {
let mut this = self.clone();
Box::pin(async move {
let result = tokio::time::timeout(
this.duration,
this.inner_handler.call(request),
).await;
match result {
Ok(Ok(response)) => Ok(response),
Ok(Err(error)) => Err(error),
Err(elapsed) => {
// Convert the error
Err(T::Error::from(elapsed))
}
}
})
}
}
JsonContentType
is a bit different. It doesn't care about the request or error
types but it does care about the response type. It must be Response
such that
we can call set_header
.
The implementation therefore is:
// Again a generic request type
impl<R, T> Handler<R> for JsonContentType<T>
where
R: 'static,
// `T` must accept requests of any type `R` and return
// responses of type `HttpResponse`
T: Handler<R, Response = HttpResponse> + Clone + 'static,
{
type Response = HttpResponse;
// Our error type is whatever `T`'s error type is
type Error = T::Error;
type Future = Pin<Box<dyn Future<Output = Result<Response, T::Error>>>>;
fn call(&mut self, request: R) -> Self::Future {
let mut this = self.clone();
Box::pin(async move {
let mut response = this.inner_handler.call(request).await?;
response.set_header("Content-Type", "application/json");
Ok(response)
})
}
}
Finally, the Handler
passed to Server::run
must use HttpRequest
and
HttpResponse
:
impl Server {
async fn run<T>(self, mut handler: T) -> Result<(), Error>
where
T: Handler<HttpRequest, Response = HttpResponse>,
{
// ...
}
}
Creating the server has not changed:
let handler = RequestHandler;
let handler = Timeout::new(handler, Duration::from_secs(30));
let handler = JsonContentType::new(handler);
server.run(handler).await
So, we now have a Handler
trait that makes it possible to break our
application up into small independent parts and re-use them. Not bad!
"What if I told you..."
Until now, we've only talked about the server side of things. But, our Handler
trait actually fits HTTP clients as well. One can imagine a client Handler
that accepts some request and asynchronously sends it to someone on the
internet. Our Timeout
wrapper is actually useful here as well.
JsonContentType
probably isn't, since it's not the client's job to set response
headers.
Since our Handler
trait is useful for defining both servers and clients,
Handler
probably isn't an appropriate name. A client doesn't handle a request,
it sends it to a server and the server handles it. Let's instead call our trait
Service
:
trait Service<Request> {
type Response;
type Error;
type Future: Future<Output = Result<Self::Response, Self::Error>>;
fn call(&mut self, request: Request) -> Self::Future;
}
This is actually almost the Service
trait defined in Tower. If you've been
able to follow along until this point you now understand most of Tower. Besides
the Service
trait, Tower also provides several utilities that implement
Service
by wrapping some other type that also implements Service
, exactly
like we did with Timeout
and JsonContentType
. These services can be
composed in ways similar to what we've done thus far.
Some example services provided by Tower:
Timeout
- This is pretty much identical to the timeout we have built.Retry
- To automatically retry failed requests.RateLimit
- To limit the number of requests a service will receive over a period of time.
Types like Timeout
and JsonContentType
are typically called middleware,
since they wrap another Service
and transform the request or response in some
way. Types like RequestHandler
are typically called leaf services, since they
sit at the leaves of a tree of nested services. The actual responses are normally
produced in leaf services and modified by middleware.
The only thing left to talk about is backpressure and poll_ready
.
Backpressure
Imagine you wanted to write a rate limit middleware that wraps a Service
and
puts a limit on the maximum number of concurrent requests the underlying service
will receive. This would be useful if you had some service that had a hard upper
limit on the amount of load it could handle.
With our current Service
trait, we don't really have a good way to implement
something like that. We could try:
impl<R, T> Service<R> for ConcurrencyLimit<T> {
fn call(&mut self, request: R) -> Self::Future {
// 1. Check a counter for the number of requests currently being
// processed.
// 2. If there is capacity left send the request to `T`
// and increment the counter.
// 3. If not somehow wait until capacity becomes available.
// 4. When the response has been produced, decrement the counter.
}
}
If there is no capacity left, we have to wait and somehow get notified when capacity becomes available. Additionally, we have to keep the request in memory while we're waiting (also called buffering). This means that the more requests that are waiting for capacity, the more memory our program would use --- if more requests are produced than our service can handle, we might run out of memory! It would be more robust to only allocate space for the request when we are sure the service has capacity to handle it. Otherwise, we risk using a lot of memory buffering requests while we wait for our service to become ready.
It would be nice if Service
had a method like this:
trait Service<R> {
async fn ready(&mut self);
}
ready
would be an async function that completes when the service has capacity
enough to receive one new request. We would then require users to first call
service.ready().await
before doing service.call(request).await
.
Separating "calling the service" from "reserving capacity" also unlocks new use cases, such as being able to maintain a set of "ready services" that we keep up to date in the background, so that when a request arrives we already have a ready service to send it to and don't have to first wait for it to become ready.
With this design, ConcurrencyLimit
could track capacity inside ready
and not
allow users to call call
until there is sufficient capacity.
Service
s that don't care about capacity can just return immediately from
ready
, or if they wrap some inner Service
, they could delegate to its
ready
method.
However, we still cannot define async functions inside traits. We could add
another associated type to Service
called ReadyFuture
, but having to return a
Future
will give us the same lifetime issues we've run into before. It would
be nice if there was some way around that.
Instead, we can take some inspiration from the Future
trait and define a method
called poll_ready
:
use std::task::{Context, Poll};
trait Service<R> {
fn poll_ready(&mut self, cx: &mut Context<'_>) -> Poll<()>;
}
This means if the service is out of capacity, poll_ready
will return
Poll::Pending
and notify the caller using the waker from the Context
when
capacity becomes available. At that point, poll_ready
can be called again, and
if it returns Poll::Ready(())
then capacity is reserved and call
can be
called.
Note that there is technically nothing that prevents users from calling call
without first making sure the service is ready. However, doing so is considered a
violation of the Service
API contract, and implementations are allowed to panic
if call
is called on a service that isn't ready!
poll_ready
not returning a Future
also means we're able to quickly check if
a service is ready without being forced to wait for it to become ready. If we
call poll_ready
and get back Poll::Pending
, we can simply decide to do
something else instead of waiting. Among other things, this allows you to build
load balancers that estimate the load of services by how often they return
Poll::Pending
, and send requests to the service with the least load.
It would still be possible get a Future
that resolves when capacity is
available using something like futures::future::poll_fn
(or
tower::ServiceExt::ready
).
This concept of services communicating with their callers about their capacity is called "backpressure propagation". You can think of it as services pushing back on their callers, and telling them to slow down if they're producing requests too fast. The fundamental idea is that you shouldn't send a request to a service that doesn't have the capacity to handle it. Instead you should wait (buffering), drop the request (load shedding), or handle the lack of capacity in some other way. You can learn more about the general concept of backpressure here and here.
Finally, it might also be possible for some error to happen while reserving
capacity, so poll_ready
probably should return Poll<Result<(), Self::Error>>
.
With this change we've now arrived at the complete tower::Service
trait:
pub trait Service<Request> {
type Response;
type Error;
type Future: Future<Output = Result<Self::Response, Self::Error>>;
fn poll_ready(
&mut self,
cx: &mut Context<'_>,
) -> Poll<Result<(), Self::Error>>;
fn call(&mut self, req: Request) -> Self::Future;
}
Many middleware don't add their own backpressure, and simply delegate to the
wrapped service's poll_ready
implementation. However, backpressure in
middleware does enable some interesting use cases, such as various kinds of rate
limiting, load balancing, and auto scaling.
Since you never know exactly which middleware a Service
might consist of, it
is important to not forget about poll_ready
.
With all this in place, the most common way to call a service is:
use tower::{
Service,
// for the `ready` method
ServiceExt,
};
let response = service
// wait for the service to have capacity
.ready().await?
// send the request
.call(request).await?;
Footnotes
1: There has been some discussion around whether call
should
take Pin<&mut Self>
or not, but so far we've decided to go with a plain &mut self
which means handlers (ahem, services) must be Unpin
. In practice that is
rarely an issue. More details here.
2: To be a bit more precise, the reason this requires the
response future to be 'static
is that writing Box<dyn Future>
actually
becomes Box<dyn Future + 'static>
, which the anonymous lifetime in fn call(&'_ mut self, ...)
doesn't satisfy. In the future, the Rust compiler team
plans to add a feature called generic associated types which will let us
get around this. Generic associated types will allow us to define the response
future as type Future<'a>
, and call
as fn call<'a>(&'a mut self, ...) -> Self::Future<'a>
but for now response futures must be 'static
.