Both Rust and C# strive for memory safety, but they employ distinct approaches. Rust’s borrow checker stands out as a compile-time guardian, preventing data races and dangling pointers, while C# relies on a runtime garbage collector.

Rust’s borrow checker meticulously tracks references to data. Each reference, known as a borrow, has specific rules it must abide by. A borrow can be exclusive (allowing only one mutable reference at a time) or shared (allowing multiple immutable references). This rigorous system ensures data consistency and prevents accidental modification while a reference is in use.

C#, on the other hand, utilizes a garbage collector that automatically reclaims unused memory. This frees developers from manual memory management, but it comes with runtime overhead. While C# offers features like `using` statements for deterministic resource disposal, it lacks Rust’s compile-time assurance against memory errors.

Here’s a table summarizing the key differences:

| Feature | Rust | C# |
|—|—|—|
| Memory management | Borrow checker | Garbage collector |
| Enforcement | Compile-time | Runtime |
| Data races | Prevents | Potentially allows |
| Dangling pointers | Prevents | Potentially allows |
| Performance | Generally faster due to static checks | Can suffer from GC pauses |
| Developer experience | Steeper learning curve, but fewer runtime surprises | Easier to learn, but can lead to unexpected runtime issues |

Ultimately, the choice between Rust and C# boils down to project requirements and developer preferences. Rust excels in safety-critical applications where memory errors are unacceptable, while C# shines in scenarios where development speed and runtime flexibility are paramount.