Pathetic Side of A Good Developer

As a software developer, when you want to make your work perfect and quality enough, this is what you will be facing ->

"A good developer write code that have less bugs, more extensible and more maintainable. However, these are the things that you can't measure by statistics or figures.

The productivity of good developers come from less rework, less debugging and less bugs. Unfortunately, that's not something that you can put on your resume to brag about. In fact, easily readable, easily extensible, easily testable architecture and code is not something visible; users are not going to see it, your boss is not going to concern over it and practically, no one cares. What they care, is whether you can deliver the projects on time.

Even so, the ability to deliver projects on time doesn't tell us anything about a developer's productivity. Sometimes the one who delivers his portion on time may not be a good developer; it may be that the project is too easy, or maybe that initial estimation is too pessimistic. Likewise, a project that takes a long time to complete may not be because the developers are incompetent or lazy; it may be that the project is very hard, or maybe that the planning itself is unrealistic.

The bottom line is there is no way to tell a good developer from a bad one. It's hard to compare the developers based on project basis because it's hard to know how hard a project is unless you have done it. But there is no two software projects that are alike."

Do u agree? Full article can read from -> Why Good Developers Are Not Getting 10 times the Pay?

If you have a naive manager, the common definition of good developer would be depend on the quantity -> how many tasks you can accomplished within a period of time compare to your peers. So dude, work smart and don't work hard, or else waste your energy nia...