[Vinnl]

That allows other code to run while e.g. files are being moved. It indeed can be somewhat painful ([1] is the classic criticism) and in shell scripts is not as beneficial. I think there are even sync alternatives (i.e. equivalent functions that don't need `await`) for most of them, but again: these are the APIs I'm already familiar with, which is the entire point - and thus the await-stuff comes naturally for me, because I intuitively know those APIs are async.

[1] https://journal.stuffwithstuff.com/2015/02/01/what-color-is-...

[imglorp]

Yes and a shell script would do it with one &, while this goop is a mountain of async, nesting, futures management, and boilerplate. No thanks.

[Vinnl]

Sure, but again: I know and recognise this syntax and the APIs. What's boilerplate to me, I hardly see, whereas compact Bash operators are noise to my eyes.

[Vinnl]

(Though to be honest, I'm also somewhat sceptical that a single & in Bash would be sufficient to move a bunch of files in a particular order, and restore them properly if the process gets terminated somewhere halfway along the process. But what I'm sure about is that I wouldn't have been able to write that in a reasonable amount of time!)