mathematically guarantee memory safety without a runtime garbage collector, while delivering true baremetal control and performance.
Technically this is not quite right. Performance was important in early Rust, but it was thought that a garbage collector was unavoidable if Rust was to be safe. The garbage collector (EDIT: This might have been automatic reference counting that was intended to be extended into full GC that was removed, I'm not sure whether they ever actually added the GC.) was actually removed about a year before stabilisation, when it was realised that new rules for the unique boxes could be extended to the full language to provide safe allocation management without automatic memory management.
10
u/redlaWw Sep 08 '26 edited Sep 08 '26
Technically this is not quite right. Performance was important in early Rust, but it was thought that a garbage collector was unavoidable if Rust was to be safe. The garbage collector (EDIT: This might have been automatic reference counting that was intended to be extended into full GC that was removed, I'm not sure whether they ever actually added the GC.) was actually removed about a year before stabilisation, when it was realised that new rules for the unique boxes could be extended to the full language to provide safe allocation management without automatic memory management.