I guess choosing when or how a program deallocates is important in a language that's close to the metal. Rust tries to be zero cost while providing abstraction

I guess choosing when or how a program deallocates is important in a language that's close to the metal. Rust tries to be zero cost while providing abstractions that make it seemingly a high level language but ultimately things like this show that it's not exactly zero cost because abstractions can incur hidden penalties. There needs to be some internal syntax that allows a rust user to explicitly control deallocation when needed. If I started reading code where people would randomly move a value into another thread and essentially do nothing I would be extremely confused. Any language that begins to rely on "trick" or "hacks" as standard patterns exposes a design flaw. Maybe if rust provided special syntax that a function can be decorated with so that it does deallocation in another thread automatically? Or maybe an internal function called drop_async...? This would make this pattern an explicit part of the language rather than a strange hack/trick.