> There's consistent use of Result and Option in std,
Well, there are dozens[0] of incompatible error types in std, two of them being just called `Error`[1][2].
Everytime you create a function that use more one of the different error types from std (for instance, an I/O error and a TryFrom-related error) you have to create a custom Error enum to accommodate the different kinds of errors from std…
> community agreement to do things that way
And the community agreement is e̶r̶r̶o̶r̶-̶c̶h̶a̶i̶n̶, ̶f̶a̶i̶l̶u̶r̶e̶, ̶ s̶n̶a̶f̶u̶, this_error, unless it's for a binary crate and then it's ̶a̶n̶y̶h̶o̶w̶, ̶e̶y̶r̶e̶, color-eyre.
The error ecosystem is much more fragmented than the async one (even though I think this_error is here to last, so I don't have to migrate once again…). In the async world, there's pretty much tokio (but I think it would actually be better if it interoperated better with other runtimes so alternatives could emerge)
> A lot of it is much harder to read.
Ah yes, fut.await is fundamentally harder to read than res?, right?
Overall, you vastly underestimate the friction that the `Result`-based error handling adds. I still think it's worth it, and it's been slowly getting better (did I say I loved this_error?), but it remained one of the biggest point of friction in Rust over the 8 years (time flies) I've been using it. Async is comparatively less disrupting (mostly because it only appears in the call stacks where you're doing I/O, whereas errors are ubiquitous).
Tons of stuff in std and many other crates don't use async. A lot of stuff is harder and more code to do async. A lot of it is much harder to read.
That's the difference.