m04-zero-cost

actionbook/rust-skills · updated Apr 8, 2026

$npx skills add https://github.com/actionbook/rust-skills --skill m04-zero-cost
0 commentsdiscussion
summary

Layer 1: Language Mechanics

skill.md

Zero-Cost Abstraction

Layer 1: Language Mechanics

Core Question

Do we need compile-time or runtime polymorphism?

Before choosing between generics and trait objects:

  • Is the type known at compile time?
  • Is a heterogeneous collection needed?
  • What's the performance priority?

Error → Design Question

Error Don't Just Say Ask Instead
E0277 "Add trait bound" Is this abstraction at the right level?
E0308 "Fix the type" Should types be unified or distinct?
E0599 "Import the trait" Is the trait the right abstraction?
E0038 "Make object-safe" Do we really need dynamic dispatch?

Thinking Prompt

Before adding trait bounds:

  1. What abstraction is needed?

    • Same behavior, different types → trait
    • Different behavior, same type → enum
    • No abstraction needed → concrete type
  2. When is type known?

    • Compile time → generics (static dispatch)
    • Runtime → trait objects (dynamic dispatch)
  3. What's the trade-off priority?

    • Performance → generics
    • Compile time → trait objects
    • Flexibility → depends

Trace Up ↑

When type system fights back:

E0277 (trait bound not satisfied)
    ↑ Ask: Is the abstraction level correct?
    ↑ Check: m09-domain (what behavior is being abstracted?)
    ↑ Check: m05-type-driven (should use newtype?)
Persistent Error Trace To Question
Complex trait bounds m09-domain Is the abstraction right?
Object safety issues m05-type-driven Can typestate help?
Type explosion m10-performance Accept dyn overhead?

Trace Down ↓

From design to implementation:

"Need to abstract over types with same behavior"
    ↓ Types known at compile time → impl Trait or generics
    ↓ Types determined at runtime → dyn Trait

"Need collection of different types"
    ↓ Closed set → enum
    ↓ Open set → Vec<Box<dyn Trait>>

"Need to return different types"
    ↓ Same type → impl Trait
    ↓ Different types → Box<dyn Trait>

Quick Reference

Pattern Dispatch Code Size Runtime Cost
fn foo<T: Trait>() Static +bloat Zero
fn foo(x: &dyn Trait) Dynamic Minimal vtable lookup
impl Trait return Static +bloat Zero
Box<dyn Trait> Dynamic Minimal Allocation + vtable

Syntax Comparison

// Static dispatch - type known at compile time
fn process(x: impl Display) { }      // argument position
fn process<T: Display>(x: T) { }     // explicit generic
fn get() -> impl Display { }         // return position

// Dynamic dispatch - type determined at runtime
fn process(x: &dyn Display) { }      // reference
fn process(x: Box<dyn Display>) { }  // owned

Error Code Reference

Error Cause Quick Fix
E0277 Type doesn't impl trait Add impl or change bound
E0308 Type mismatch Check generic params
E0599 No method found Import trait with use
E0038 Trait not object-safe Use generics or redesign

Decision Guide

Scenario Choose Why
Performance critical Generics Zero runtime cost
Heterogeneous collection dyn Trait Different types at runtime
Plugin architecture dyn Trait Unknown types at compile
Reduce compile time dyn Trait Less monomorphization
Small, known type set enum No indirection

Object Safety

A trait is object-safe if it:

  • Doesn't have Self: Sized bound
  • Doesn't return Self
  • Doesn't have generic methods
  • Uses where Self: Sized for non-object-safe methods

Anti-Patterns

Anti-Pattern Why Bad Better
Over-generic everything Compile time, complexity Concrete types when possible
dyn for known types Unnecessary indirection Generics
Complex trait hierarchies Hard to understand Simpler design
Ignore object safety Limits flexibility Plan for dyn if needed

Related Skills

When See
Type-driven design m05-type-driven
Domain abstraction m09-domain
Performance concerns m10-performance
Send/Sync bounds m07-concurrency

Discussion

Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)
  • No comments yet — start the thread.
general reviews

Ratings

4.747 reviews
  • Yusuf Menon· Dec 28, 2024

    m04-zero-cost reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.

  • Isabella Gill· Dec 12, 2024

    We added m04-zero-cost from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.

  • Layla Khanna· Dec 12, 2024

    Keeps context tight: m04-zero-cost is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.

  • Camila Ghosh· Nov 3, 2024

    Keeps context tight: m04-zero-cost is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.

  • Ren Rahman· Nov 3, 2024

    We added m04-zero-cost from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.

  • Lucas Kim· Oct 22, 2024

    m04-zero-cost is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.

  • William Yang· Oct 22, 2024

    m04-zero-cost fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.

  • Lucas Huang· Oct 6, 2024

    Registry listing for m04-zero-cost matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.

  • Sophia Gupta· Sep 25, 2024

    I recommend m04-zero-cost for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.

  • Isabella Desai· Sep 25, 2024

    Keeps context tight: m04-zero-cost is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.

showing 1-10 of 47

1 / 5