[caenorst]

And don't you think it would have been more efficient to write it down clean at first with good comments and code practice ? Those good practices are here for a reason and not just for annoying you for the sack of "beauty". You would save more time for yourself when you wanna expand the paper further or just reuse some part of it, have better reputation for your work, and gain some citation because people will have the tendency to use your code as a starting point.

[inimino]

"Writing it down clean at first" implies that you know what is going to work when you start. If that's the case, it's not research.

[patrick5415]

No, it would not be more efficient. I’ve tried this route and it hands down consumes way more time. Until it’s clear that something will get re-used, it’s most efficient to leave it dirty.

The software types love to sht on researchers for their poor quality code. Yet a few threads over, there’s always a discussion about how more tests don’t make it onto the kanban board (or whatever you guys are using these days) when crunch time approaches. It’s not just us.