> The lack of implicit magic in the language. Destructors (specifically the fact that they are called automatically) is implicit. That's it. Well, destructors

> The lack of implicit magic in the language. Destructors (specifically the fact that they are called automatically) is implicit. That's it. Well, destructors and unwinding. Many, many bugs in unsafe code have been found through unwinding code paths being not fully accounted for. At least in safe code that doesn't use catch_unwind, the worst that can happen is an unexpected state of an object shared across threads. What's even more fun is the combination of the two. For instance, the catch_unwind function has a big flaw, where it returns an arbitrary Box<dyn Any> to represent the panic payload, and if you aren't very careful about dropping that object, its destructor can panic and start unwinding again. (There are plans to fix this by putting the payload in a shim type that makes the destructor abort on unwind, without actually changing its type_id. I find it quite an ugly hack, but there's not really any other way around it.) (There are also other ideas to remove language support for unwinding destructors entirely. I'm against that for a few different reasons, but I'm not the one running the show.)