Why does the compiler allow pattern matching an enum in a function argument if it will never work and are there places pattern matching is useful?

Question

While looking at this axum crate example , I noticed a weird syntax in the function signature:

async fn create_user(
    Json(payload): Json<CreateUser>,
) -> impl IntoResponse {
  // blah blah
}

I eventually understood that Json<T>(pub T) is a newtype struct and wrapping Json(payload) means that we're extracting the T - we don't care about Json<T> , only the contained T .

I tested this out:

fn baz(Some(value): Option<i32>) {
    println!("value = {}", value);
}

The compiler complains that None is not covered.

My questions are:

• Why does the compiler accept this syntax for enums knowing that it will never work (ie there will always be a pattern that is not covered)?

• Are there other places where pattern matching in function arguments is useful?

Answer 1

There is a distinction between refutable and irrefutable patterns.

You probably understand refutable patterns, ie patterns that can fail to match. These are typically tied to conditionals:

• if let <PAT> =...
• match... { <PAT> =>... }
• while <PAT> =...

However, irrefutable patterns are perhaps more prevalent.

• let <PAT> =...
• for <PAT> in...
• fn f(<PAT>: ...)
• |<PAT>| {... }
• basically anywhere you can declare a new variable is usually done via irrefutable patterns

You may understand their more advanced usage as "destructuring" or "structured bindings". Irrefutable patterns can:

• introduce new variables: a
• dereference: &a
• destructure structs: { field1, field2, ... }
• destructure tuples: (a, b)
• destructure newtypes and single variant enums
• immediately discard the value: _
• mix all the above

This is explained further in Patterns and Matching in the Rust book.

So in essence, a pattern can go in place of a function parameter, but the pattern must not fail . Using patterns for destructuring struct fields or tuples is very common, though probably moreso for closures than functions.