I get how those concerns would apply to a C dialect, but not really to Rust. Since Rust is an entirely new language you shouldn't expect it to work exactly like

I get how those concerns would apply to a C dialect, but not really to Rust. Since Rust is an entirely new language you shouldn't expect it to work exactly like C, unlike you would expect of a C-derived language. Most of Rust's safety features are handled at compile time, and they are usually handled explicitly, not implicitly. A few examples about initialization: * An instance of a struct is created by giving an initial value to each field. Leaving out any field is a compile error. Since structs are always completely initialized, you can't accidentally pass references to partially initialized structs like you could in a C++ or Java constructor. * All local variables must be initialized. Accessing a variable before initialization is a compile time error. * Structs have no implicit default value. The default value can be defined by implementing a trait, either by yourself or by deriving it with a macro (which would default integers to 0 and so on). Default values are only used by a fixed set on functions in the standard library, and never implicitly. The overflowing case is one of the only cases where Rust is a bit more implicit. Integer overflow is checked at run time in debug builds (so over/underflow causes a panic) and defined to wrap around in release builds. However, the standard library also defines methods on numbers which explicitly use wrapping, saturating or checked (either return a Result value or crash) semantics.