Internalization disincetivizes people from making tight markets in lit venues because you will only get filled when an internalizer thought the flow was toxic. This in turn means that markets are wider for all participants.
Well an IDE with less features is going to be faster than VS, that isn't a question. Just see Sublime Text, insanely fast until you start adding extensions and it gradually gets slower and slower.
But Resharper is an absolute hog. For as slow as Visual Studio can be, it quadruples it in all categories. Just look in this thread, you can see dozens of people saying the same thing: Resharper has massive performance problems.
> Well an IDE with less features is going to be faster than VS, that isn't a question. Just see Sublime Text, insanely fast until you start adding extensions and it gradually gets slower and slower.
In principle, only a small proportion of features need to be actively consuming cycles. Most require no resources until invoked by the user.
Only a small proportion of those features are actively involved with drawing and so need to block the UI thread sometimes.
And only a small proportion of those features perform some essential drawing operation and so need to block the UI thread every frame.
So while a badly designed IDE with fewer features will outperform a badly designed IDE with many features, both will be trounced by a well-designed IDE with many features. It's the design that matters.
In my experience, no other VS extension even begins to affect performance to the degree ReSharper does. JetBrains readily acknowledges the performance issues. Is there a conflict of design between VS and ReSharper? Perhaps. But that their homegrown IDE build around ReSharper will work faster than VS + ReSharper is a pretty safe bet. Apples and oranges, here.