> I was given the impression that as soon as the lifeline was out of scope, the resources were cleaned. And you are right. Even though GP is almost right, lif

> I was given the impression that as soon as the lifeline was out of scope, the resources were cleaned. And you are right. Even though GP is almost right, lifetimes do interact with destructors and, in fact, dictate when values go out of scope and hence when drop (Rust destructor) is called. > So it acts like a GCed language in most ways, in that, most of the time you don't have to worry about cleaning up after yourself Nope. In Rust you almost always have to worry about cleaning up although not explicitly, but via lifetime and ownership management. Sometimes you're lucky and those lifetimes can be inferred, but you still have to think about ownership a lot. > and that it is hard to memory leak. But not in the same way. In Rust you can memory leak only when: - Using GC like Arc or Rc with cycles. - On blocks/fns marked as unsafe (which are mandatory for unsafe operations). - Running into a Rust bug.