Adviser quickly (1-5 hours) for $10.A script for $5. - page 9
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
Practice has shown that self-promotion has killed more than one such thread. I can only advise a sensible procedure for finding a programmer. IMHO.
1. Read the article "Expert Advisor to order. Instructions for the trader" written by the legendary komposter. This is a practical guide to preparing the TOR.
2. Search the forum in search of programmers (not ads for orders), read discussions, see how people behave.
3. Make a list of candidates you like (those who are sympathetic, express themselves correctly and accurately, have a long experience on the forum with a large list of published serious scripts/articles).
4. Draw up TOR and contact candidates, after preliminary agreement to send TOR for cost estimation.
5. Choose one and thank the rest.
In my experience, the undisputed authorities are komposter and Integer (I apologize to the other professionals, I just have not encountered).
Algorithm is good, but one thing is certain: the "unconditional" auto-author, the more expensive his services :) So you try to find a reasonable compromise.
Although probably there is a grain of truth in the fact that the stingy pays many times over...
Several times, with my modest programming experience, I have agreed to fulfil orders for simple, elementary designs.
The impression is unequivocal. As a rule, customers have a very poor idea of what they want to get in the end.
And to get them to interpret the terms of reference - it sometimes takes more time than the actual writing of the tip! The terms of reference (without irony) are sometimes difficult to extract!
Usually the customer himself is completely unaware of what he wants ...
From one "ToR": When the schedule for line A falls just short of line B...
Further communication in the voice:
Me: a little is how much and in what ?
Zach: Are you an idiot, don't you know what a little is ?
The algorithm is good, but one problem: the more "unconditional" an auto-item is, the more expensive its services are :) So you try to find a reasonable compromise.
Although there is probably some truth in the fact that a miser pays many times over...
An algorithm that has been tested for generations. Even from this thread, it is clear that "haphazard communication" leads to greater losses of money and nerves.
And saving should be done skillfully: simple things to do yourself, optional things to order for a modest fee, and the potential graals to give grads.
They will intelligently, reasonably and correctly show you that you are wrong again and you will remember the lesson very well because it cost good money.
Wouldn't it be easier to let you know, together with the terms of reference, how much you are prepared to pay
for the work of a programmer.
As a rule, the customer himself does not fully understand what he wants...
From one "ToR": When the schedule for line A falls just a little short of line B...
Further communication by voice:
Me: a little is how much and in what ?
Zach: are you an idiot, don't you know what a little is ?
not targeted, but still a tip - if you see that the customer himself does not know what he wants, be more tolerant: offer a choice of several options. let him choose from them!
not targeted, but still a piece of advice - if you see that the customer does not know what he wants, be more tolerant: offer several options to choose from. let him choose from them!
That's how coders do it ... 2-3 variants and then the customer decides.
May be there are those who don't want to bother with "pincers pulling TK".
not targeted, but still a piece of advice - if you can see from your communication that the customer himself does not know what he wants, be more tolerant: offer several options at once. let him choose from them!
Definitely - you shouldn't do that!
"For" at any "flush" result (and there will be no other) the culprit will always be the programmer.
With all the consequences...
Definitely - you shouldn't do that!
"For" in case of any "failed" result (and there will be no other) the programmer will always be to blame.
With all the consequences...
you do not understand! ;-) if the customer cannot formulate the condition himself, you can simply give him a choice of several options (based on your experience of development, formalization). and he can tell you if it fits his "confusing description" or not. if he says that one option fits, then let him! But if you start to write without formalizing the task (in terms of compliance with "wordy description of the customer"), then - yes, I completely agree with you - no matter how you write the programmer, it will still be bad, you will have to redo it 2-3-4-5 times.
Eh, it's hard to be a coder after all. And it's also hard for a customer to communicate with a coder if he (the coder) is "such an idiot that he doesn't know what 'a little bit' means". And the funny thing is that to formulate the TOR correctly, the customer's mind has to be turned in the same way as that idiot coder's.