that's what peer review is supposed to be for. the difference is that at the end of the day the code has to actually work and not just look good. papers are onl

that's what peer review is supposed to be for. the difference is that at the end of the day the code has to actually work and not just look good. papers are only reviewed to look good. to get the same scrutiny as code the reviewers would have to reproduce the findings in the paper.