On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 06:14:24PM +0100, Alice Ryhl wrote: > On Wed, Nov 29, 2023 at 5:55 PM Alice Ryhl <aliceryhl@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > >> + pub fn commit(self, file: ARef<File>) { > > >> + // SAFETY: `self.fd` was previously returned by `get_unused_fd_flags`, and `file.ptr` is > > >> + // guaranteed to have an owned ref count by its type invariants. > > >> + unsafe { bindings::fd_install(self.fd, file.0.get()) }; > > > > > > Why file.0.get()? Where did that come from? > > > > This gets a raw pointer to the C type. > > > > The `.0` part is a field access. `ARef` struct is a tuple struct, so its > > fields are unnamed. However, the fields can still be accessed by index. > > Oh, sorry, this is wrong. Let me try again: > > This gets a raw pointer to the C type. The `.0` part accesses the > field of type `Opaque<bindings::file>` in the Rust wrapper. Recall > that File is defined like this: > > pub struct File(Opaque<bindings::file>); > > The above syntax defines a tuple struct, which means that the fields > are unnamed. The `.0` syntax accesses the first field of a tuple > struct [1]. > > The `.get()` method is from the `Opaque` struct, which returns a raw > pointer to the C type being wrapped. It'd be nice if this could be written in a more obvious/elegant way. And if not a comment would help. I know there'll be more text then code but until this is second nature to read I personally won't mind... Because searching for this specific syntax isn't really possible.