Your analogy is flawed. The CPU doesn't care at all about how or what code looks like, all the nice comments explaining what it does, nice naming conventions, w

Your analogy is flawed. The CPU doesn't care at all about how or what code looks like, all the nice comments explaining what it does, nice naming conventions, whether its easy to understand or not. They have zero impact on the final compiled code. The executable ends up as a spaghetti of machine instructions with countless gotos in a single large file. Using bad ingredients in food, or poor quality materials in construction has tremendous impact on the final product. >"Better is the enemy of the worse" is no excuse to have spaghetti code, or 50,000 lines of code files. It means that good is sometimes more convenient than perfect. Spaghetti code is not good to begin with. Just calling code good or bad doesn't mean much - ultimately, results matter - if your code doesn't have tons of bugs, if your team can add features without any problems, if you can ship reasonably on time, if your product delivers value to the end user, etc - then you have succeeded. It doesn't matter what outsiders think about the code or what labels people give. Its best to ignore them and continue doing good work.