tbh "trait" feels like a very problematic name for that type, for this kind of educational purpose - `trait` is already an established concept and keyword: http

tbh "trait" feels like a very problematic name for that type, for this kind of educational purpose - `trait` is already an established concept and keyword: https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch10-02-traits.html https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/ch10-02-traits.html It's especially problematic because traits don't have memory behaviors like this article in most cases - by default they're unsized, because it's a description of behavior, not data, and you can't even use them as a struct field without extra work. Like, replace "trait" in here with "box" and see how confusing it would be to be describing how you saved memory by boxing your box, because option doesn't box like many other languages do.