Let's be clear - it's OK to write shit code. There are many many contexts in which writing shit code is perfectly valid. Indeed there are times when writing sh

Let's be clear - it's OK to write shit code. There are many many contexts in which writing shit code is perfectly valid. Indeed there are times when writing shit code is almost a requirement. You're experimenting, you're researching, you're learning, you're having fun, you're in the initial build stages of something, you're under time constraints. And lots of code should not have tests, or be works of art, or be bug free, or be commented, or be comprehensible to less experienced developers. It's a problem that Github is used for assessing programming skills at all because those assessments ALWAYS look for consistent perfect code as a high arts with full code coverage etc etc. Public code also has time context - maybe you wrote that four years ago when you were new at some technology or skill - what exactly does that mean to the assessor who is seeking perfection? I don't want to direct anyone to my code as an assessment because it's always misread by the assessor. Even worse I find myself rethinking posting code online because I think "but what if I get assessed on this will it hurt my career"? I think that analysis of people's public/Github code is a hiring antipattern and the fallback of those unskilled in assessing candidates.