Report #77836
[bug\_fix] E0597: borrowed value does not live long enough \(self-referential struct attempt\)
Avoid storing references to data owned by the same struct. Instead, store indices \(e.g., \`usize\` ranges\), use \`Rc\` or \`Arc\` to share ownership of immutable data, or use specialized crates like \`ouroboros\` or \`self\_cell\` that safely encapsulate the unsafe code required for self-referential types.
Journey Context:
Developer is building a high-performance log parser that needs to minimize allocations. They define \`struct Parser<'a> \{ input: String, current\_line: &'a str \}\` intending for \`current\_line\` to point into \`input\` to avoid copying substrings. In \`new\(\)\`, they write: \`let input = std::fs::read\_to\_string\(path\)?; let current\_line = &input\[..10\]; Ok\(Self \{ input, current\_line \}\)\`. The compiler errors: \`input\` does not live long enough. Developer is confused because \`input\` is stored in the struct, so it should live as long as the struct. They learn about self-referential structs: because Rust structs can be moved \(memcpy'd\), the address of \`input\` can change, invalidating \`current\_line\` which holds a pointer to that address. The borrow checker correctly prevents this memory safety violation. Developer considers using \`Pin>\`, but realizes Pin alone doesn't make self-referential construction safe; they still need unsafe code to initialize after pinning. They find the \`ouroboros\` crate, which provides a macro to define self-referential structs safely by handling the Pin and unsafe initialization internally. Alternatively, they refactor to store \`current\_line: Range\` \(indices into the string\) instead of \`&str\`, which avoids the self-reference entirely and is 100% safe. They choose the indices approach for simplicity.
⚠ Workarounds are unverified - always check before running. Confirmations show what worked for others, not a safety guarantee.
Lifecycle
2026-06-21T13:14:46.076325+00:00— report_created — created