A list of programmers who are great at writing pay-for-performance codes and don't screw around - page 12
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I'm sorry, I'm not making a big fuss, I'm against the unsubstantiated listing. You wanted and put a person on the list, and you think it's okay. I wrote that you have to argue for inclusion, but this is a noisy showdown. It's not an objective argument.
I think a good argument would be the number of published scripts. I think a good programmer would share something.
And what are your successes (from the list above) in world championships in auto-trading?
I mean in practice, under real conditions. I would like to know who are you dealing with?
I am interested in expert-writers and theorists only for beginners.
I am interested in beginners who may be lured by beautiful pictures drawn by the turkeys.
No, the profitability of EAs is definitely not a criterion. None of the "mega legends" of the Russian-language forums have ever made it into the top three. I hope no one will be offended if I inadvertently underestimated anyone.
Besides, the conditions were far from real.
No, the profitability of EAs is definitely not a criterion.
Profitability by itself is definitely not a criterion. Accuracy and thoroughness of the code in details - this is a more important criterion, but unfortunately, only... another programmer :) Profitability is in the idea, the EA is in the code. They are different things.
In addition, the programmers may have good reasons for not sending their EAs in competitions.
I think the number of published scripts is a good argument.
The quantity is not the quality. I have seen some EAs with terrifying mistakes... my jaw was dropped.
I think the best criterion is still the customer's feedback. The customer can evaluate the following points on their own:
1. Was the work done in time?
Was the code annotated and readable?
3. Have all the customer's feasible wishes been taken into account?
4. If any wishes are not fulfilled or not feasible, was the performer able to explain the reason to the customer in a comprehensible way?
5. Has the performer helped the customer to understand the use of the provided adviser (indicator, script ...), accompanied by parting words, advice?
All of this is what the client needs.
"1. Is the work done in time?" - how many cases where it seems to agree and then the customer is something else contributes ... and the deadline moves.
"2. is the code commented and readable? "If the customer doesn't understand coding, he doesn't really care about it.
The discussion of ToR alone may be longer than the coding. It takes time to grasp what he really wants. Sometimes you have to use pliers.
"4. If any requests are not met or not implemented, was the performer able to explain to the customer the reason on an understandable level?" - and to p.5. it is clear that every normal. proger explains ( sometimes it is necessary to explain so that the brain boils)
Just give him a grade of 0 to 10 and don't worry about it.
1. there are times when the deadline is postponed by mutual agreement because of the customer's needs. But that is not what we are talking about here, we are talking about a blatant dynaema.
2. He may not understand coding. But, "on the bummer" - I don't agree. Firstly, it may be a temporary phenomenon - he doesn't understand now and will understand later. Secondly, the code may be upgraded several times in future and it must be suitable for this. Otherwise there are a couple of programmers in my department - when they look at the code they wrote half a year ago, at first they exclaim for a week: "Holy shit, WHAT have I written here?!" But you have to work, you can't help it.
4. I'm a very experienced programmer myself, I know. However, a good programmer differs from a bad one in that he can explain on the hoop what's what. While a bad one has only one argument - "you can't, because you can't". In other words, the customer should be satisfied (not angry), even if he didn't get what he wanted. Of course, I don't mean cases of psychopathology on the part of the client - that happens too. But in general, customers are usually sane people and if properly explained, they will understand.
Concerning the rating from 0 to 10 - of course. I only gave the criteria by which the customer can evaluate the programmer's work.
I recommend writing a set of rules for communicating with us to the list of programmers.
The programmer should explain why it is so and not so.
Although, in my practice of expert writing, I evaluate profitability or unprofitability of the customer's idea by reading TOR only, if the idea is not complicated, if it is complicated, then I will make a couple of checks and also say the approximate outcome. If the customer has thought over the information ready to order the development, begin to discuss the details of TOR.
Often clients not only don't know the concepts, they don't distinguish an order from a position. And sometimes they use such terminology that you have to look up words in dictionaries.
Our customers, express their thoughts clearly and understandably, and use as few colloquialisms as possible.
An example of strings of TOR that the programmer does not understand.
This is a signal came, so we open, stop and where the profit is to be closed I have to adjust it myself in options. Everyone has entered the market and wait. We have to wait and wait, and then the expert has to close the profitable deal by himself.
In this way none of the programmers will understand exactly, by what rules to open a deal, what to expect, how to close....
"Like a signal came in, so we open, stop and where the profit is closing I have to set it up myself in the settings. Everyone has entered the market and waits. We wait, we wait, and then the expo closes the profitable deal by itself.
This is exactly the way none of the programmers will understand, by which rules to open a deal, what to wait for, how to close....
On this question at my profile the link to the book in Ozone (Structure of Magic).
4. I'm a programmer myself, and I know. However, a good programmer differs from a bad one in that he can explain on the hoop what's what. A bad programmer has only one argument - "you can not, because you can not". In other words, 1. the customer should be satisfied (not angry), even if he didn't get what he wanted. Of course, I'm not referring to cases of psychopathology on the part of the customer, this also happens. But in general, customers are usually sane people and if properly explained, they will understand.
Concerning the score from 0 to 10 - of course. I just cited the criteria by which the customer can evaluate the programmer's work.
With this approach on the part of the customer we must think about how to ensure that the programmer is satisfied as well. Usually there is 80% of psychoanalysis and only 20% of programming and the constant "what's unclear here"("a simple turkey for free"). Instructions are chronically not read.