Skip to content
Open
Changes from all commits
Commits
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension

Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
141 changes: 141 additions & 0 deletions src/coding-guidelines/expressions.rst
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -399,3 +399,144 @@ Expressions
/* ... */
}


.. guideline:: Do not shift an expression by a negative number of bits or by greater than or equal to the number of bits that exist in the operand
:id: gui_8BiWvapv0lUa
:category: mandatory
:status: draft
:release: 1.0.0-latest
:fls: fls_sru4wi5jomoe
:decidability: undecidable
:scope: module
:tags: numerics, surprising-behavior, defect

In particular, the user should limit the Right Hand Side (RHS) parameter used for left shifts and right shifts (i.e. the ``<<`` and ``>>`` binary operators) to only the range ``0..=N-1``\ , where ``N`` is the number of bits of the Left Hand Side (LHS) parameter. For example, in ``a << b``\ , if ``a`` is of type ``u32``\ , then ``b`` **must belong to** the range ``0..=31``.

This rule applies to all types which implement the ``core::ops::Shl`` and / or ``core::ops::Shr`` traits, for Rust Version greater than or equal to ``1.6.0``.

For versions prior to ``1.6.0``\ , this rule applies to all types for which the ``<<`` and ``>>`` operators are valid. That is, it applies to the following primitive types:


* ``i8``
* ``i16``
* ``i32``
* ``i64``
* ``i128``
* ``isize``
* ``u8``
* ``u16``
* ``u32``
* ``u64``
* ``u128``
* ``usize``

.. rationale::
:id: rat_aMguLhw0ORnD
:status: draft

This is a Defect Avoidance rule, directly inspired by `INT34-C. Do not shift an expression by a negative number of bits or by greater than or equal to the number of bits that exist in the operand <https://wiki.sei.cmu.edu/confluence/x/ItcxBQ>`_.

In Rust these out-of-range shifts don't give rise to Undefined Behavior; however, they are still problematic in Safety Critical contexts for two reasons.

Reason 1: inconsistent behavior
===============================

The behavior of shift operations depends on the compilation mode. Say for example, that we have a number ``x`` of type ``uN``\ , and we perform the operation

``x << M``

Then, it will behave like this:

.. list-table::
:header-rows: 1

* - **Compilation Mode**
- **\ ``0 <= M < N``\ **
Copy link
Collaborator

@PLeVasseur PLeVasseur Aug 24, 2025

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Hmm... formatting issue of some type?

10:08:43 PM: /opt/build/repo/src/coding-guidelines/expressions.rst:442: CRITICAL: Unexpected section title.
10:08:43 PM: Reason 1: inconsistent behavior
10:08:43 PM: =============================== [docutils]
10:08:43 PM: /opt/build/repo/src/coding-guidelines/expressions.rst:454: WARNING: Inline strong start-string without end-string. [docutils]
10:08:43 PM: /opt/build/repo/src/coding-guidelines/expressions.rst:455: WARNING: Inline strong start-string without end-string. [docutils]
10:08:43 PM: /opt/build/repo/src/coding-guidelines/expressions.rst:456: WARNING: Inline strong start-string without end-string. [docutils]
10:08:43 PM: /opt/build/repo/src/coding-guidelines/expressions.rst:475: CRITICAL: Unexpected section title.
10:08:43 PM: Reason 2: programmer intent

Ah, I wonder if we cannot have section titles in here? I think that's probably the case.

EDIT: I'm feeling more and more like this issue is relevant 🙃
#166

- **\ ``M < 0``\ **
- **\ ``N <= M``\ **
* - Debug
- Shifts normally
- Panics
- Panics
* - Release
- Shifts normally
- Shifts by ``M mod N``
- Shifts by ``M mod N``


..

Note: the behavior is exactly the same for the ``>>`` operator.


Panicking in ``Debug`` is an issue by itself, however, a perhaps larger issue there is that its behavior is different from that of ``Release``. Such inconsistencies aren't acceptable in Safety Critical scenarios.

Reason 2: programmer intent
===========================

There is no scenario in which it makes sense to perform a shift of negative length, or of more than ``N - 1`` bits. The operation itself becomes meaningless.

For both of these reasons, the programmer must ensure the RHS operator stays in the range ``0..=N-1``.

.. non_compliant_example::
:id: non_compl_ex_4YFDofvjh9eV
:status: draft

As seen in the example below:


* A ``Debug`` build **panics**\ ,
*
Whereas a ``Release`` build prints the values:

.. code-block::

61 << -1 = 2147483648
61 << 4 = 976
61 << 40 = 15616

This shows **Reason 1** prominently.

**Reason 2** is not seen in the code, because it is a reason of programmer intent: shifts by less than 0 or by more than ``N - 1`` (\ ``N`` being the bit-length of the value being shifted) are both meaningless.

.. code-block:: rust

let bits : u32 = 61;
let shifts = vec![-1, 4, 40];

for sh in shifts {
println!("{bits} << {sh} = {}", bits << sh);
}

.. compliant_example::
:id: compl_ex_3BkrRwwK5zhX
:status: draft

As seen in the example below:


* Both ``Debug`` and ``Release`` give the same exact output, which addresses **Reason 1**.
* Out-of-range shifts are caught and avoided before they happen.
*
The output shows what's happening:

.. code-block::

Performing 61 << -1 would be meaningless and crash-prone; we avoided it!
61 << 4 = 976
Performing 61 << 40 would be meaningless and crash-prone; we avoided it!

The output shows how this addresses **Reason 2**.

.. code-block:: rust

let bits : u32 = 61;
let shifts = vec![-1, 4, 40];

for sh in shifts {
if 0 <= sh && sh < 32 {
println!("{bits} << {sh} = {}", bits << sh);
} else {
println!("Performing {bits} << {sh} would be meaningless and crash-prone; we avoided it!");
}
}