Type anonymity

Closures succinctly capture variables from enclosing scopes. Does this have any consequences? It surely does. Observe how using a closure as a function parameter requires generics, which is necessary because of how they are defined:

#![allow(unused)] fn main() { // `F` must be generic. fn apply<F>(f: F) where F: FnOnce() { f(); } }

When a closure is defined, the compiler implicitly creates a new anonymous structure to store the captured variables inside, meanwhile implementing the functionality via one of the traits: Fn, FnMut, or FnOnce for this unknown type. This type is assigned to the variable which is stored until calling.

Since this new type is of unknown type, any usage in a function will require generics. However, an unbounded type parameter <T> would still be ambiguous and not be allowed. Thus, bounding by one of the traits: Fn, FnMut, or FnOnce (which it implements) is sufficient to specify its type.

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

See also:

A thorough analysis, Fn, FnMut, and FnOnce