Qodana: Code Quality Monitoring Platform

Code quality metrics are, quite universally, garbage.<p>At best they take a bunch of subjective preferences (come up with by some random person), assert them as gospel and teach people that they are &quot;best practise&quot;. At worst, they will cause a team to waste time making meaningless changes and junking up their git history.<p>Generally if I see a project that scores an A+++ on one of these metrics, it gives me the impression that they&#x27;ve got their priorities rather mixed up.<p>It&#x27;s the classic thing of &quot;identifying <i>real</i> problems automatically is really extremely hard, so what we&#x27;ll do is double down on the really simplistic factors (which are unfortunately meaningless)&quot;.

In the same way that it can be difficult to justify spending a week to reduce technical debt within a fast-moving engineering team, I think there&#x27;s a parallel challenge for industry to make the work of maintenance be seen -- and be rewarded -- equally alongside feature development.<p>Perhaps we already have (or at least nearly have) enough code, systems and services to achieve the tasks that 97.5% of us need, but they&#x27;re all broken and non-interoperable in frustrating ways.<p>Can we spend a while honing and refining those before building incompatible replacements? Or, failing that, at least identify the core issues before repeating the same mistakes?

Say if I develop in python, Why should I use this instead of pylint which is open source and vetted by the community?

Anyone know which open source linters this runs? Or is it just running their own proprietary linters?