>In every company I was good at ... to analyze problems. >Every company had this one (or more) people who just coded and could put a solution into code super f

>In every company I was good at ... to analyze problems. >Every company had this one (or more) people who just coded and could put a solution into code super fast. ... I grasp things fast but my code was never as clean, good or delievered fast enough. That's the point of working in diverse teams. A few teams I have worked on code bases that were clean as a clean room, everything solved by the books but on a high-level flawed, with errors while running in production, hard to maintain, modify and extend. If you look at typical "startup code" (or "scientific code") you quickly realize that's it's rarely that clean. On the other hand that's where the money is at and also it can be cleaned up afterwards. From my practical experience I can say that super clean code bases are much more static and it takes longer times to change them. So yeah, if you're good at analyzing stuff that's super useful. Especially if you intend to work at more complex domains. Also I'd suggest to work with Python, I think there a pragmatic approach is more welcomes. (Also interesting, fairly complex stuff is done with Java at some places)