Fix ruff rules for comprehensions and performance

[cclauss]

Summary

 [tool.ruff.lint]
- select = ["E", "F", "W", "I", "B", "PIE"]
+ select = ["B", "C4", "E", "F", "I", "PERF", "PIE", "W"]

% ruff check --statistics

4	C416   	unnecessary-comprehension
2	C401   	unnecessary-generator-set
2	PERF203	try-except-in-loop
2	PERF401	manual-list-comprehension
Found 10 errors.
No fixes available (6 hidden fixes can be enabled with the `--unsafe-fixes` option).

https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/#flake8-comprehensions-c4
https://docs.astral.sh/ruff/rules/#perflint-perf

Checklist

• I understand that this PR may be closed in case there was no previous discussion. (This doesn't apply to typos!)
• I've added a test for each change that was introduced, and I tried as much as possible to make a single atomic change.
• I've updated the documentation accordingly.

% ruff rule PERF401

manual-list-comprehension (PERF401)

Derived from the Perflint linter.

Fix is sometimes available.

What it does

Checks for for loops that can be replaced by a list comprehension.

Why is this bad?

When creating a transformed list from an existing list using a for-loop,
prefer a list comprehension. List comprehensions are more readable and
more performant.

Using the below as an example, the list comprehension is ~10% faster on
Python 3.11, and ~25% faster on Python 3.10.

Note that, as with all perflint rules, this is only intended as a
micro-optimization, and will have a negligible impact on performance in
most cases.

Example

original = list(range(10000))
filtered = []
for i in original:
    if i % 2:
        filtered.append(i)

Use instead:

original = list(range(10000))
filtered = [x for x in original if x % 2]

If you're appending to an existing list, use the extend method instead:

original = list(range(10000))
filtered.extend(x for x in original if x % 2)

[codspeed-hq]

Merging this PR will not alter performance

✅ 7 untouched benchmarks

---

_{Comparing cclauss:ruff-rules-C4-and-PERF (2a177ab) with main (72fce81)}