Back it up with some evidence
Not sure what this has to do with the library’s quality though, it is a high quality modern python library.
With only JavaScript, Perl, Lua, PHP, Python and TypeScript enabled, fastapi is 64th and nestjs is 73rd, out of 136 libaries. They have a score that's ~10 times lower than the fastest libraries.
It is not, this benchmark is purely about speed, not about being "suitable for your next project". You're the one adding all these other constraints. You only need to deselect some filters when you're doing something like comparing dynamic languages, which you did and wasn't even the initial claim discussed. I also doubt most people would call FastAPI "suitable for your next project" compared to something like Django or Flask that is already well known and maintained.
> But again, I'm not sure what this has to do with it being a high quality modern python library.
We're in a subthread discussing a claim on the FastAPI website that it's "Fast: Very high performance, on par with NodeJS and Go.", and how it's obviously wrong for Go, and possibly wrong for NodeJS.
In the continuous benchmarks, that you can see here [1], taking the last one that has finished at the time of this post (run id 31abee0e-b0c5-414f-9288-216c48e3a70e): Fastapi is 81st, Express 107th, Gin 57th, NodeJS 63rd. In the fortunes part, plain Go is always higher than Gin but varies wildly, from ~15% to ~43%. FastAPI itself is around 7%
I think Express is still the most used JS framework, by a large margin, so claiming to be faster than NodeJS may be fair, as most people thinking about NodeJS will think Express. For Go, you have to be very generous with the "on par", to the point that it's almost meaningless in my opinion. Especially since frameworks are less popular in Go, people tend to use the standard library, which has great performance here.