Add new section on trait bounds.

Cargo.lock

@@ -768,6 +768,10 @@ dependencies = [
 name = "trait_"
 version = "0.1.0"
 
+[[package]]
+name = "trait_bounds"
+version = "0.1.0"
+
 [[package]]
 name = "tryfrom"
 version = "0.1.0"

book/src/04_traits/05_trait_bounds.md

@@ -0,0 +1,154 @@
+# Trait bounds 
+
+We've seen two use cases for traits so far:
+
+- Unlocking "built-in" behaviour (e.g. operator overloading)
+- Adding new behaviour to existing types (i.e. extension traits)
+
+There's a third use case: **generic programming**.  
+
+## The problem
+
+All our functions and methods, so far, have been working with **concrete types**.  
+Code that operates on concrete types is usually straightforward to write and understand. But it's also
+limited in its reusability.  
+Let's imagine, for example, that we want to write a function that returns `true` if an integer is even.
+Working with concrete types, we'd have to write a separate function for each integer type we want to 
+support:
+
+```rust
+fn is_even_i32(n: i32) -> bool {
+    n % 2 == 0
+}
+
+fn is_even_i64(n: i64) -> bool {
+    n % 2 == 0
+}
+
+// Etc.
+```
+
+Alternatively, we could write a single extension trait and then different implementations for each integer type:
+
+```rust
+trait IsEven {
+    fn is_even(&self) -> bool;
+}
+
+impl IsEven for i32 {
+    fn is_even(&self) -> bool {
+        self % 2 == 0
+    }
+}
+
+impl IsEven for i64 {
+    fn is_even(&self) -> bool {
+        self % 2 == 0
+    }
+}
+
+// Etc.
+```
+
+The duplication remains.
+
+## Generic programming
+
+We can do better using **generics**.  
+Generics allow us to write that works with a **type parameter** instead of a concrete type:
+
+```rust
+fn print_if_even<T>(n: T) 
+where
+    T: IsEven + Debug
+{
+    if n.is_even() {
+        println!("{n:?} is even");
+    }
+}
+```
+
+`print_if_even` is a **generic function**.  
+It isn't tied to a specific input type. Instead, it works with any type `T` that:
+
+- Implements the `IsEven` trait.
+- Implements the `Debug` trait.
+
+This contract is expressed with a **trait bound**: `T: IsEven + Debug`.  
+The `+` symbol is used to require that `T` implements multiple traits. `T: IsEven + Debug` is equivalent to
+"where `T` implements `IsEven` **and** `Debug`".
+
+## Trait bounds
+
+What purpose do trait bounds serve in `print_if_even`?  
+To find out, let's try to remove them:
+
+```rust
+fn print_if_even<T>(n: T) {
+    if n.is_even() {
+        println!("{n:?} is even");
+    }
+}
+```
+
+This code won't compile:
+
+```text
+error[E0599]: no method named `is_even` found for type parameter `T` in the current scope
+ --> src/lib.rs:2:10
+  |
+1 | fn print_if_even<T>(n: T) {
+  |                  - method `is_even` not found for this type parameter
+2 |     if n.is_even() {
+  |          ^^^^^^^ method not found in `T`
+
+error[E0277]: `T` doesn't implement `Debug`
+ --> src/lib.rs:3:19
+  |
+3 |         println!("{n:?} is even");
+  |                   ^^^^^ `T` cannot be formatted using `{:?}` because it doesn't implement `Debug`
+  |
+help: consider restricting type parameter `T`
+  |
+1 | fn print_if_even<T: std::fmt::Debug>(n: T) {
+  |                   +++++++++++++++++
+```
+
+Without trait bounds, the compiler doesn't know what `T` **can do**.  
+It doesn't know that `T` has an `is_even` method, and it doesn't know how to format `T` for printing. 
+Trait bounds restrict the set of types that can be used by ensuring that the behaviour required by the function
+body is present.
+
+## Inlining trait bounds
+
+All the examples above used a **`where` clause** to specify trait bounds:
+
+```rust
+fn print_if_even<T>(n: T) 
+where
+    T: IsEven + Debug
+//  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+//  This is a `where` clause
+{
+    // [...]
+}
+```
+
+If the trait bounds are simple, you can **inline** them directly next to the type parameter:
+
+```rust
+fn print_if_even<T: IsEven + Debug>(n: T) {
+    //           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
+    //           This is an inline trait bound
+    // [...]
+}
+```
+
+## The function signature is king
+
+You may wonder why we need trait bounds at all. Can't the compiler infer the required traits from the function's body?  
+It could, but it won't.  
+The rationale is the same as for [explicit type annotations on function parameters](../02_basic_calculator/02_variables#function-arguments-are-variables): 
+each function signature is a contract between the caller and the callee, and the terms must be explicitly stated. 
+This allows for better error messages, better documentation, less unintentional breakages across versions, 
+and faster compilation times.

book/src/04_traits/09_from.md

@@ -39,8 +39,8 @@ pub trait Into<T>: Sized {
 }
 ```
 
-These trait definitions showcase a few concepts that we haven't seen before: **supertraits**, **generics**, 
-and **implicit trait bounds**. Let's unpack those first.
+These trait definitions showcase a few concepts that we haven't seen before: **supertraits** and **implicit trait bounds**. 
+Let's unpack those first.
 
 ### Supertrait / Subtrait
 
@@ -48,12 +48,6 @@ The `From: Sized` syntax implies that `From` is a **subtrait** of `Sized`: any t
 implements `From` must also implement `Sized`.
 Alternatively, you could say that `Sized` is a **supertrait** of `From`.
 
-### Generics
-
-Both `From` and `Into` are **generic traits**.  
-They take a type parameter, `T`, to refer to the type being converted from or into.
-`T` is a placeholder for the actual type, which will be specified when the trait is implemented or used.
-
 ### Implicit trait bounds
 
 Every time you have a generic type parameter, the compiler implicitly assumes that it's `Sized`.
@@ -69,15 +63,7 @@ pub struct Foo<T> {
 is actually equivalent to:
 
 ```rust
-pub struct Foo<T> 
-where
-    T: Sized,
-//  ^^^^^^^^^
-//  This is known as a **trait bound**
-//  It specifies that this implementation applies exclusively
-//  to types `T` that implement `Sized`
-//  You can require multiple traits to be implemented using 
-//  the `+` sign. E.g. `Sized + PartialEq<T>`
+pub struct Foo<T: Sized> 
 {
     inner: T,
 }
@@ -86,9 +72,6 @@ where
 You can opt out of this behavior by using a **negative trait bound**:
 
 ```rust
-// You can also choose to inline trait bounds,
-// rather than using `where` clauses
-
 pub struct Foo<T: ?Sized> {
     //            ^^^^^^^
     //            This is a negative trait bound
@@ -97,7 +80,8 @@ pub struct Foo<T: ?Sized> {
 ```
 
 This syntax reads as "`T` may or may not be `Sized`", and it allows you to
-bind `T` to a DST (e.g. `Foo<str>`).  
+bind `T` to a DST (e.g. `Foo<str>`). It is a special case, though: negative trait bounds are exclusive to `Sized`,
+you can't use them with other traits.  
 In the case of `From<T>`, we want _both_ `T` and the type implementing `From<T>` to be `Sized`, even
 though the former bound is implicit.
 

exercises/04_traits/05_trait_bounds/Cargo.toml

@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+[package]
+name = "trait_bounds"
+version = "0.1.0"
+edition = "2021"

exercises/04_traits/05_trait_bounds/src/lib.rs

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@
+// TODO: Add the necessary trait bounds to `min` so that it compiles successfully.
+//   Refer to `std::cmp` for more information on the traits you might need.
+//
+// Note: there are different trait bounds that'll make the compiler happy, but they come with
+// different _semantics_. We'll cover those differences later in the course when we talk about ordered
+// collections (e.g. BTreeMap).
+
+/// Return the minimum of two values.
+pub fn min<T>(left: T, right: T) -> T {
+    if left <= right {
+        left
+    } else {
+        right
+    }
+}