[typ]

I'd bet, on average, the quality of proprietary code is worse than open-source code. There have been decades of accumulated slop generated by human agents with wildly varied skill levels, all vibe-coded by ruthless, incompetent corporate bosses.

[Manouchehri]

There's only very niche fields where closed-source code quality is often better than open-source code.

Exploits and HFT are the two examples I can think of. Both are usually closed source because of the financial incentives.

[ozim]

Here we can start debating what means better code.

I haven’t seen HFT code but I have seen examples of exploit codes and most of it is amateur hour when it comes to building big size systems.

They are of course efficient in getting to the goal. But exploits are one off code that is not there to be maintained.

[kortilla]

It doesn’t matter what the average is though. If 1% of software is open source, there is significantly more closed source software out there and given normal skills distributions, that means there is at least as much high quality closed source software out there, if not significantly more. The trick is skipping the 95% of crap.

[hirvi74]

In my time, I have potentially written code that some legal jurisdictions might classify as a "crime against humanity" due to the quality.

[Take8435]

Not to mention, a team member is (surprise!) fired or let go, and no knowledge transfer exists. Womp, womp. Codebase just gets worse as the organization or team flails.

Seen this way too often.

[icedchai]

Developers are often treated as cogs. Anyone should be able to step in a pick things up instantly. It’s just typing, right? /s