Surely you realize that this, and what the author wrote, are basically the same ever rehashed GC vs non-GC language discussion. Performance characteristics of each is not anywhere near as simple as any of these things claim, so i'm going to leave this alone.
"EDIT: If you want to learn more about memory management in Rust, see https://doc.rust-lang.org/book/first-edition/the-stack-and-t...
Again, i see no guarantees here.
I see it saying things like "This program has one variable binding, x. This memory needs to be allocated from somewhere. Rust ‘stack allocates’ by default, which means that basic values ‘go on the stack’."
Can someone point me to an actual language level guarantee in a spec? I looked, and i don't see it.
I can't see anything that makes it non-conformant to build a rust compiler that dynamically allocates and places all of these on the heap, and is very non-constant time for local variable allocation.
But again, i didn't spend more than a few minutes browsing, so i may have missed it (For example, https://doc.rust-lang.org/reference/memory-allocation-and-lifetime.html says nothing here, the requirements i can find in this entire chapter can easily be met by using dynamic allocation. There are not guarantees on space or time usage that would require a real stack :P).
I'm totally willing to believe nobody has written down a good enough spec yet, just saying i don't see it ATM :)
I want to strongly differentiate between what "one implementation of rust does" and what "the language guarantees". Because if you are going to claim it's rust that makes the guarantee, as the author did, you should be able to back the claim up.