What #[derive(Mul)] generates

• 1 Tuple structs
• 2 Regular structs
• 3 Enums

Deriving Mul is quite different from deriving Add. It is not used to multiply two structs together. Instead it will normally multipy a struct, which can have multiple fields, with a single primitive type (e.g. a u64). A new struct is then created with all the fields from the previous struct multiplied by this other value.

A simple way of explaining the reasoning behind this difference between Add and Mul deriving, is looking at arithmetic on meters. One meter can be added to one meter, to get two meters. Also, one meter times two would be two meters, but one meter times one meter would be one square meter. As this second case clearly requires more knowledge about the meaning of the type in question deriving for this is not implemented.

NOTE: In case you don’t want this behaviour you can add #[mul(forward)] in addition to #[derive(Mul)]. This will instead generate a Mul implementation with the same semantics as Add.

1 Tuple structs

When deriving for a tuple struct with a single field (i.e. a newtype) like this:

#[derive(Mul)]
struct MyInt(i32);

Code like this will be generated:

impl<__RhsT> ::core::ops::Mul<__RhsT> for MyInt
    where i32: ::core::ops::Mul<__RhsT, Output = i32>
{
    type Output = MyInt;
    fn mul(self, rhs: __RhsT) -> MyInt {
        MyInt(self.0.mul(rhs))
    }
}

The behaviour is slightly different for multiple fields, since the right hand side of the multiplication now needs the Copy trait. For instance when deriving for a tuple struct with two fields like this:

#[derive(Mul)]
struct MyInts(i32, i32);

Code like this will be generated:

impl<__RhsT: ::core::marker::Copy> ::core::ops::Mul<__RhsT> for MyInts
    where i32: ::core::ops::Mul<__RhsT, Output = i32>
{
    type Output = MyInts;
    fn mul(self, rhs: __RhsT) -> MyInts {
        MyInts(self.0.mul(rhs), self.1.mul(rhs))
    }
}

The behaviour is similar with more or less fields.

2 Regular structs

When deriving Mul for a regular struct with a single field like this:

#[derive(Mul)]
struct Point1D {
    x: i32,
}

Code like this will be generated:

impl<__RhsT> ::core::ops::Mul<__RhsT> for Point1D
    where i32: ::core::ops::Mul<__RhsT, Output = i32>
{
    type Output = Point1D;
    fn mul(self, rhs: __RhsT) -> Point1D {
        Point1D { x: self.x.mul(rhs) }
    }
}

The behaviour is again slightly different when deriving for a struct with multiple fields, because it still needs the Copy as well. For instance when deriving for a tuple struct with two fields like this:

#[derive(Mul)]
struct Point2D {
    x: i32,
    y: i32,
}

Code like this will be generated:

impl<__RhsT: ::core::marker::Copy> ::core::ops::Mul<__RhsT> for Point2D
    where i32: ::core::ops::Mul<__RhsT, Output = i32>
{
    type Output = Point2D;
    fn mul(self, rhs: __RhsT) -> Point2D {
        Point2D {
            x: self.x.mul(rhs),
            y: self.y.mul(rhs),
        }
    }
}

3 Enums

Deriving Mul for enums is not (yet) supported, except when you use `#[mul(forward)]. Although it shouldn’t be impossible no effort has been put into this yet.