Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
开发只读github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

rust-ownershipRust ownership 命令行

Agent Skill

rust-ownership 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

总安装

256

周安装

11

GitHub Stars

29

下载量

90
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:rust-ownership(Rust ownership 命令行)
来源仓库:https://github.com/huiali/rust-skills
仓库路径:skills/rust-ownership
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/huiali/rust-skills --skill rust-ownership
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/huiali/rust-skills --skill rust-ownership

简介

Rust ownership 命令行工具用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息。

  • 适用于 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理的任务。
  • 通过 npx skills add 命令从指定 GitHub 仓库安装,需结合原始 README 核验具体用法。
  • 安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写操作。
  • 该技能适合在 Rust 所有权机制相关的开发协作场景中使用。

SKILL.md

Solution Patterns

Pattern 1: Value Moved After Use

let s1 = String::from("hello");
let s2 = s1;
// println!("{}", s1); // Compile error!

Root Cause: Ownership transferred from s1 to s2, s1 is no longer valid.

Solutions:

  • Need two copies → use clone()
  • Only need to read → pass by reference &s1
  • s2 is temporary → consider redesign

Pattern 2: Borrow Conflict

let mut s = String::from("hello");
let r1 = &s;
let r2 = &mut s; // Conflict!
// println!("{}", r1);

Root Cause: Immutable and mutable borrows coexist.

Solutions:

  • Ensure mutable borrow completes before creating new borrows
  • Restructure code organization

Pattern 3: Lifetime Mismatch

fn longest<'a>(s1: &'a str, s2: &'a str) -> &'a str {
    if s1.len() > s2.len() { s1 } else { s2 }
}

Root Cause: Return value lifetime must be tied to one of the inputs.

Key Solutions:

  1. Clarify each reference's lifetime
  2. Use named lifetimes to express relationships
  3. Prefer returning owned types

Workflow

Step 1: Who Owns the Data?

SituationOwner
Function parameterCaller owns
Function-local variableFunction owns (destroyed on return)
Struct fieldStruct instance owns
Arc<T>Multiple shared owners

Step 2: Is Borrowing Appropriate?

OperationBorrow TypeNotes
Read-only&TMultiple can coexist
Needs mutation&mut TOnly one at a time
Will original be modified during borrow?If yes, that's the issue

Step 3: Can Lifetimes Be Avoided?

Return String instead of &str
    ↓
Use owned collections instead of slices
    ↓
Use Arc/Rc for shared ownership
    ↓
Lifetimes aren't always necessary

Smart Pointer Selection

ScenarioChoiceReason
Heap-allocate single valueBox<T>Simple and direct
Single-threaded shared reference countingRc<T>Lightweight
Multi-threaded shared reference countingArc<T>Atomic operations
Need runtime borrow checkingRefCell<T>Single-threaded interior mutability
Multi-threaded interior mutabilityMutex<T> or RwLock<T>Thread-safe

Common Pitfalls

Anti-PatternProblemCorrect Approach
.clone() everywhereHides ownership issuesThink about actual ownership needs
'static for everythingToo loose and impreciseUse actual required lifetimes
Box::leak() memory leaksMemory wasteUse proper lifetime management
Fighting the borrow checkerDigging your own holeUnderstand and work with compiler design

Practical Guidance

Common Beginner Questions

1. "When should I use references vs ownership?"

  • Function parameters: use references (unless consuming)
  • Function returns: use references (if caller doesn't need ownership)
  • Storage: consider lifetime complexity

2. "How do I add lifetime annotations?"

  • Most cases: compiler can infer
  • Need explicit: structs, trait impls, methods returning references
  • Use meaningful names: 'connection, 'file

3. "Why doesn't this borrow work?"

  • Mutable borrows make original inaccessible
  • Check borrow scope ranges
  • Consider code reorganization

Error Code Quick Reference

CodeMeaningDon't SayAsk Instead
E0382Use of moved value"clone it"Who should own this data?
E0597Lifetime too short"extend lifetime"Are scope boundaries correct?
E0506Borrow not ended before mutation"end borrow first"Where should mutation occur?
E0507Move out of reference"clone before move"Why move from reference?
E0515Return non-owned data"return owned"Should caller own the data?
E0716Temporary value lifetime insufficient"bind to variable"Why is this temporary?
E0106Missing lifetime parameter"add 'a"What's the lifetime relationship?

Thinking Process

When encountering ownership issues, follow these steps:

1. What's this data's role in the domain?

  • Entity (unique identity) → owned
  • Value object (interchangeable) → clone/copy acceptable
  • Temporary computation result → consider refactor

2. Is ownership design intentional or accidental?

  • Intentional → work within constraints
  • Accidental → consider redesign

3. Fix symptom or redesign?

  • If failed 3 times → escalate to design level

Trace Up (Design Analysis)

When ownership errors persist, trace to design level:

E0382 (moved value)
    ↑ Ask: What design choice led to this ownership pattern?
    ↑ Check: Is this an entity or value object?
    ↑ Check: Are there other constraints?

Persistent E0382 → rust-resource: Should use Arc/Rc for sharing?
Persistent E0597 → rust-type-driven: Are scope boundaries correct?
E0506/E0507 → rust-mutability: Should use interior mutability?

Trace Down (Implementation)

From design decisions to implementation:

"Data needs immutable sharing"
    ↓ Multi-threaded: Arc<T>
    ↓ Single-threaded: Rc<T>

"Data needs exclusive ownership"
    ↓ Return owned value

"Data is temporary use only"
    ↓ Use references within scope

"Need to pass data between functions"
    ↓ Consider lifetimes or return owned

Review Checklist

When reviewing ownership-related code:

  • Each value has a clear owner
  • Borrows don't outlive the borrowed data
  • Mutable and immutable borrows don't overlap
  • Lifetime annotations accurately reflect data relationships
  • Smart pointer choice matches threading requirements
  • .clone() is used intentionally, not to avoid compiler errors
  • Lifetime elision is leveraged where possible
  • Complex lifetime scenarios are documented

Verification Commands

# Check compilation
cargo check

# Run tests
cargo test

# Check for common mistakes
cargo clippy -- -W clippy::clone_on_copy -W clippy::unnecessary_clone

# Verify no memory leaks in tests
cargo test --features leak-check

Common Pitfalls

1. Clone Abuse

Symptom: .clone() everywhere to satisfy compiler

Fix: Understand actual ownership requirements, use references where possible

2. Lifetime Overuse

Symptom: Complex lifetime annotations everywhere

Fix: Return owned types, use smart pointers

3. Fighting Borrow Checker

Symptom: Constantly rewriting to satisfy compiler

Fix: Step back and redesign data flow

Related Skills

  • rust-mutability - Interior mutability patterns (Cell, RefCell)
  • rust-concurrency - Send/Sync and thread safety
  • rust-unsafe - Raw pointers and manual memory management
  • rust-lifetime-complex - Advanced lifetime patterns (HRTB, GAT)
  • rust-resource - Resource management and RAII patterns
  • rust-type-driven - Type-driven design

Localized Reference

  • Chinese version: SKILL_ZH.md - 完整中文版本,包含所有内容

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

33.34%
按下载量换算30

Claude

29.4%
按下载量换算26

Cursor

19.79%
按下载量换算18

Gemini CLI

9.09%
按下载量换算8

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills