add typestate pattern chapter for idiomatic rust

src/SUMMARY.md

@@ -437,6 +437,10 @@
     - [Semantic Confusion](idiomatic/leveraging-the-type-system/newtype-pattern/semantic-confusion.md)
     - [Parse, Don't Validate](idiomatic/leveraging-the-type-system/newtype-pattern/parse-don-t-validate.md)
     - [Is It Encapsulated?](idiomatic/leveraging-the-type-system/newtype-pattern/is-it-encapsulated.md)
+  - [Typestate Pattern](idiomatic/leveraging-the-type-system/typestate-pattern.md)
+    - [Typestate Pattern Example](idiomatic/leveraging-the-type-system/typestate-pattern/typestate-example.md)
+    - [Beyond Simple Typestate](idiomatic/leveraging-the-type-system/typestate-pattern/typestate-advanced.md)
+    - [Typestate Pattern with Generics](idiomatic/leveraging-the-type-system/typestate-pattern/typestate-generics.md)
 
 ---
 

src/idiomatic/leveraging-the-type-system/typestate-pattern.md

@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
+---
+minutes: 30
+---
+
+## Typestate Pattern: Problem
+
+How can we ensure that only valid operations are allowed on a value based on its
+current state?
+
+```rust,editable
+use std::fmt::Write as _;
+
+#[derive(Default)]
+struct Serializer {
+    output: String,
+}
+
+impl Serializer {
+    fn serialize_struct_start(&mut self, name: &str) {
+        let _ = writeln!(&mut self.output, "{name} {{");
+    }
+
+    fn serialize_struct_field(&mut self, key: &str, value: &str) {
+        let _ = writeln!(&mut self.output, "  {key}={value};");
+    }
+
+    fn serialize_struct_end(&mut self) {
+        self.output.push_str("}\n");
+    }
+
+    fn finish(self) -> String {
+        self.output
+    }
+}
+
+fn main() {
+    let mut serializer = Serializer::default();
+    serializer.serialize_struct_start("User");
+    serializer.serialize_struct_field("id", "42");
+    serializer.serialize_struct_field("name", "Alice");
+
+    // serializer.serialize_struct_end(); // ← Oops! Forgotten
+
+    println!("{}", serializer.finish());
+}
+```
+
+<details>
+
+- This `Serializer` is meant to write a structured value. The expected usage
+  follows this sequence:
+
+```bob
+serialize struct start
+-+---------------------
+ |
+ +--> serialize struct field
+      -+---------------------
+       |
+       +--> serialize struct field
+            -+---------------------
+             |
+             +--> serialize struct end
+```
+
+- However, in this example we forgot to call `serialize_struct_end()` before
+  `finish()`. As a result, the serialized output is incomplete or syntactically
+  incorrect.
+
+- One approach to fix this would be to track internal state manually, and return
+  a `Result` from methods like `serialize_struct_field()` or `finish()` if the
+  current state is invalid.
+
+- But this has downsides:
+
+  - It is easy to get wrong as an implementer. Rust’s type system cannot help
+    enforce the correctness of our state transitions.
+
+  - It also adds unnecessary burden on the user, who must handle `Result` values
+    for operations that are misused in source code rather than at runtime.
+
+- A better solution is to model the valid state transitions directly in the type
+  system.
+
+  In the next slide, we will apply the **typestate pattern** to enforce correct
+  usage at compile time and make it impossible to call incompatible methods or
+  forget to do a required action.
+
+</details>

src/idiomatic/leveraging-the-type-system/typestate-pattern/typestate-advanced.md

@@ -0,0 +1,94 @@
+## Beyond Simple Typestate
+
+How do we manage increasingly complex configuration flows with many possible
+states and transitions, while still preventing incompatible operations?
+
+```rust
+struct Serializer {/* [...] */}
+struct SerializeStruct {/* [...] */}
+struct SerializeStructProperty {/* [...] */}
+struct SerializeList {/* [...] */}
+
+impl Serializer {
+    // TODO, implement:
+    //
+    // fn serialize_struct(self, name: &str) -> SerializeStruct
+    // fn finish(self) -> String
+}
+
+impl SerializeStruct {
+    // TODO, implement:
+    //
+    // fn serialize_property(mut self, name: &str) -> SerializeStructProperty
+
+    // TODO,
+    // How should we finish this struct? This depends on where it appears:
+    // - At the root level: return `Serializer`
+    // - As a property inside another struct: return `SerializeStruct`
+    // - As a value inside a list: return `SerializeList`
+    //
+    // fn finish(self) -> ???
+}
+
+impl SerializeStructProperty {
+    // TODO, implement:
+    //
+    // fn serialize_string(self, value: &str) -> SerializeStruct
+    // fn serialize_struct(self, name: &str) -> SerializeStruct
+    // fn serialize_list(self) -> SerializeList
+    // fn finish(self) -> SerializeStruct
+}
+
+impl SerializeList {
+    // TODO, implement:
+    //
+    // fn serialize_string(mut self, value: &str) -> Self
+    // fn serialize_struct(mut self, value: &str) -> SerializeStruct
+    // fn serialize_list(mut self) -> SerializeList
+
+    // TODO:
+    // Like `SerializeStruct::finish`, the return type depends on nesting.
+    //
+    // fn finish(mut self) -> ???
+}
+```
+
+<details>
+
+- Building on our previous serializer, we now want to support **nested
+  structures** and **lists**.
+
+- However, this introduces both **duplication** and **structural complexity**.
+
+- Even more critically, we now hit a **type system limitation**: we cannot
+  cleanly express what `finish()` should return without duplicating variants for
+  every nesting context (e.g. root, struct, list).
+
+- To better understand this limitation, let’s map the valid transitions:
+
+```bob
+    +-----------+   +---------+------------+-----+
+    |           |   |         |            |     |
+    V           |   V         |            V     |
+                +                                |
+serializer --> structure --> property --> list +-+
+
+    |           |   ^           |          ^
+    V           |   |           |          |
+                |   +-----------+          |
+  String        |                          |
+                +--------------------------+
+```
+
+- From this diagram, we can observe:
+  - The transitions are recursive
+  - The return types depend on _where_ a substructure or list appears
+  - Each context requires a return path to its parent
+
+- With only concrete types, this becomes unmanageable. Our current approach
+  leads to an explosion of types and manual wiring.
+
+- In the next chapter, we’ll see how **generics** let us model recursive flows
+  with less boilerplate, while still enforcing valid operations at compile time.
+
+</details>

src/idiomatic/leveraging-the-type-system/typestate-pattern/typestate-example.md

@@ -0,0 +1,99 @@
+## Typestate Pattern: Example
+
+The typestate pattern encodes part of a value’s runtime state into its type.
+This allows us to prevent invalid or inapplicable operations at compile time.
+
+```rust,editable
+use std::fmt::Write as _;
+
+#[derive(Default)]
+struct Serializer {
+    output: String,
+}
+
+struct SerializeStruct {
+    serializer: Serializer,
+}
+
+impl Serializer {
+    fn serialize_struct(mut self, name: &str) -> SerializeStruct {
+        writeln!(&mut self.output, "{name} {{").unwrap();
+        SerializeStruct { serializer: self }
+    }
+
+    fn finish(self) -> String {
+        self.output
+    }
+}
+
+impl SerializeStruct {
+    fn serialize_field(mut self, key: &str, value: &str) -> Self {
+        writeln!(&mut self.serializer.output, "  {key}={value};").unwrap();
+        self
+    }
+
+    fn finish_struct(mut self) -> Serializer {
+        self.serializer.output.push_str("}\n");
+        self.serializer
+    }
+}
+
+fn main() {
+    let serializer = Serializer::default()
+        .serialize_struct("User")
+        .serialize_field("id", "42")
+        .serialize_field("name", "Alice")
+        .finish_struct();
+
+    println!("{}", serializer.finish());
+}
+```
+
+<details>
+
+- This example is inspired by Serde’s
+  [`Serializer` trait](https://docs.rs/serde/latest/serde/ser/trait.Serializer.html).
+  Serde uses typestates internally to ensure serialization follows a valid
+  structure. For more, see: <https://serde.rs/impl-serializer.html>
+
+- The key idea behind typestate is that state transitions happen by consuming a
+  value and producing a new one. At each step, only operations valid for that
+  state are available.
+
+```bob
++------------+  serialize struct   +-----------------+
+| Serializer | ------------------> | SerializeStruct | <------+
++------------+                     +-----------------+        |
+                                                              |
+   |   ^                             |     |                  |
+   |   |     finish struct           |     | serialize field  |
+   |   +-----------------------------+     +------------------+
+   |
+   +---> finish
+```
+
+- In this example:
+
+  - We begin with a `Serializer`, which only allows us to start serializing a
+    struct.
+
+  - Once we call `.serialize_struct(...)`, ownership moves into a
+    `SerializeStruct` value. From that point on, we can only call methods
+    related to serializing struct fields.
+
+  - The original `Serializer` is no longer accessible — preventing us from
+    mixing modes (such as starting another _struct_ mid-struct) or calling
+    `finish()` too early.
+
+  - Only after calling `.finish_struct()` do we receive the `Serializer` back.
+    At that point, the output can be finalized or reused.
+
+- If we forget to call `finish_struct()` and drop the `SerializeStruct` early,
+  the `Serializer` is also dropped. This ensures incomplete output cannot leak
+  into the system.
+
+- By contrast, if we had implemented everything on `Serializer` directly — as
+  seen on the previous slide, nothing would stop someone from skipping important
+  steps or mixing serialization flows.
+
+</details>