> I guess researchers really are so incompetent with software that they think code which requires debugging is useless. So published papers are held to a high

> I guess researchers really are so incompetent with software that they think code which requires debugging is useless. So published papers are held to a high standard -- filtered through editors and peer review -- while publishing code can be half-assed at best? I still disagree; if it's worth doing, it's worth doing right.