That's begging the question. Yes, of course a correct implementation will by definition obtain the correct result. I'm questioning the casual way people assume they've got the correct algorithm implemented at all.
Is your paper nothing but off-the-shelf "spike sorting", or is that used as a component of something larger? Rolling back around to the original point of source code release being a desirable thing, if it's the latter, just knowing that this one library was used from what is probably literally a single sentence in the paper that reads "We used spike sorting software X to obtain sorted spikes", when presumably the library has knobs whose settings you don't know and you still don't even have their raw data to check the settings with, you still know virtually nothing about what was actually done. Source release ought to be standard.
The degree to which people who are putatively scientists will go to bat to defend making it difficult or impossible to replicate their experiments boggles my mind.
You're still obstinately missing the point in your nerd rage — letting other people run the same source code does nothing to replicate that part of the experiment — they need an independent implementation to do that! Releasing the source code publicly actively works against that goal because anyone who reads it won't be able to do a black-box implementation.
Besides, the code is almost always worthless compared to collected data. What would actually be most valuable and practicable is for groups to be running their proprietary code on each other's public data for confirmation.
Is your paper nothing but off-the-shelf "spike sorting", or is that used as a component of something larger? Rolling back around to the original point of source code release being a desirable thing, if it's the latter, just knowing that this one library was used from what is probably literally a single sentence in the paper that reads "We used spike sorting software X to obtain sorted spikes", when presumably the library has knobs whose settings you don't know and you still don't even have their raw data to check the settings with, you still know virtually nothing about what was actually done. Source release ought to be standard.
The degree to which people who are putatively scientists will go to bat to defend making it difficult or impossible to replicate their experiments boggles my mind.