TL;DR YES!!! Frankly any paper which can't offer the basics of reproducibility is adding to the current problems across many fields. Real-World data may restr

TL;DR YES!!! Frankly any paper which can't offer the basics of reproducibility is adding to the current problems across many fields. Real-World data may restricted by copyright so be careful if this applies. If it does consider publishing with some MC data demonstrating how things are supposed to work. (You did verify your code behaviour didn't you?) Don't clean and organise code for publishing. It is a tool, it is not 100% perfect, but it is supposed to work. Unfortunately after years in the field sometimes the correct response to nit-picking is "I don't care". This is the trap between "writing code that was intended to give an answer" and "code that was intended to be re-used by others". Scientists often write code that fits into the former and this code should be published (in-case of mistakes and in the interests of reproducibility). But this code should never be taken to be of the quality that it should be built on by others unless this was the express intent. People who mistake it for that haven't understood the point of the work the author is engaging in. With regard to what license, I tend to use DWTFYWWI, or just GPL, but frankly you can pick some wonderfully closed thing if you think your code might revolutionise something which in principle stops commercial entities ripping it off directly.