[bryanlarsen]

And all the popular ones include a synchronous interface you can use instead of the async one. If if they don't, you can wrap your calls in spawn_blocking.

You might complain about it pulling in tokio, but that's a very different complaint than having to learn/use async.

[simon_void]

Is the inclusion of synchronous interfaces a new thing? When I learned actix_web 2-3 years ago for some webservices at work, the documentation surely (at least) started of with async functions everywhere. Did that change? Were synchronous interfaces introduced later in the actix_web documentation? Or did everybody switch over to axum in the meantime and axum has synchrounous interfaces!? (I just checked and according to crates.io axum seems to have 8x the recent downloads of actix_web.) background: actix_web is still the only Rust webframework I have experience with

[saghm]

You seem to have picked the framework where the selling point is literally providing an async actor model, so yes, it's probably going to be async. If you don't like async, you probably should be spending time getting experience with one of the frameworks that's less opinionated.

[danhau]

Dependencies having to pull in tokio is an even larger issue, indicating that async‘s promise of „bring your own runtime“ is a bit of a lie. Lovely, lovely dependency hell.