The old example is wrong. It would be refutable if the expression becomes if let ..., but it in the old case, with just a let ... it is irrefutable. That this example is refutable is contradicted by the next paragraph. It also gives a compiler error when given by itself (refutable pattern in local binding. pattern &[] not covered. note: let bindings require an "irrefutable pattern", like a struct or an enum with only one variant. The error specifically points to this same chapter in docs.rust-lang.org, which does not include these examples.
willcrichton
commented
11 months ago
The old example is wrong. It would be refutable if the expression becomes
if let ..., but it in the old case, with just alet ...it is irrefutable. That this example is refutable is contradicted by the next paragraph. It also gives a compiler error when given by itself (refutable pattern in local binding. pattern&[]not covered. note:letbindings require an "irrefutable pattern", like astructor anenumwith only one variant. The error specifically points to this same chapter in docs.rust-lang.org, which does not include these examples.