[DoughnutHole]

It might not be in vain, but it can often be a poor balancing of priorities. The last 10% can easily require as much work as the first 90% - perfection is expensive.

If your reason to perfect something is internal (high personal standards and taking pride in your work) then great - take the opportunity cost in stride and finish something you'll be satisfied with. But if it's external (eg. making it just that bit more impressive to others) I'd say usually your time would be better spent moving on to the next thing.

[w-m]

I'm not entirely in agreement here. While there was undoubtedly some internal motivation at work (as publishing subpar code just doesn't sit right), I believe a significant portion of it was external, and I don't see that as a negative. During the polishing phase, I had two primary goals: first, to lower the entry barriers for people who wanted to try it out, and second, to expand its capabilities as much as possible (e.g., enabling it to run on a laptop rather than a high-powered desktop, without any frame drops). I view this less as an attempt to impress others, and more as an effort to enhance utility and thus broaden the potential user base.

I do see the tradeoff between spending more time discussing the project vs perfecting its technical aspects though. This can be tough for us techy folks who don't really like evangelism. In this respect, I believe academics and technical founders face quite similar challenges.

On another note, the feedback in the replies here has been incredibly uplifting, and I want to express my sincere gratitude for that.