It definitely is a problem when the tool you're going to use a few times a week takes an extra hundred milliseconds compared to a native solution. Especially when you need to process huge data files like hand crafted makefiles. I can totally feel your pain - extra effort would've been made to avoid that at the cost of development speed. /s

I find that writing anything substantially complex in python sacrifices the development speed. That isn't its strong suit. It's that a lot of people want to write their code in it by preference.

Yeah if only it was an extra 100 milliseconds a few times a week. We have yamllint (also written in Python) in our pre-commit (also written in Python) and it definitely adds a second or two.

Also format-on-save is a common workflow.

Then remove it? There's always tradeoffs adding tooling - I'm assuming you have it in your workflow to catch downstream issues because it saves more time in the long run.

> 1. Terrible performance

Performance only matters if you're doing something compute- or disk-intensive, and then only if the libraries you're using are Python all the way down. (AI programming, at least the kind that most of us do--I don't know about places like OpenAI) is generally done with Python using libraries that use some compiled language under the hood.

And in this case--a linter--performance is almost certainly never an issue.

The only thing computers do is compute and disk.

Performance only matters if you care about performance, and I do care about performance. If you don't, fine I guess.

What do you care if a program takes one second or half a second, or even 1/10 of a second?