>I'm guessing by bad, you mean ugly. ... In my opinion, if it works, and provides the utility it was designed to bring, then it doesn't matter. If it makes money, then who really cares!
"Ugly" is subjective; I'd define "bad code" as "difficult to reason about". If you're introducing someone new to the project, how long do they have to stare at it until they can grok it? Good code is code that makes sense, where things are documented and clearly named and encapsulated and have a flow that makes them understandable.
This doesn't necessarily mean it isn't ugly. Often, it's uglier than "clever code" which does something succinctly but less obviously.
"Ugly" is subjective; I'd define "bad code" as "difficult to reason about". If you're introducing someone new to the project, how long do they have to stare at it until they can grok it? Good code is code that makes sense, where things are documented and clearly named and encapsulated and have a flow that makes them understandable.
This doesn't necessarily mean it isn't ugly. Often, it's uglier than "clever code" which does something succinctly but less obviously.