About the author
Some time ago, I landed myself a consulting gig, working on the consultation of a very popular Java IDE. Since the customer was an ex-colleague, we agreed verbally on the contractual terms.
Difficulties encountered during the project were insufficient information. And as a result of that, it was not easy to work on the consultation. After the conclusion of the project, when it came to time for payment, the customer reneged on his verbal contract, citing issues irrelevant to the contract.
Lessons:
On yet another consulting gig involving upgrading older Delphi components to a newer version of the IDE, I had absorbed the lessons above, and included terms absorbed from the lessons above. Unfortunately, while drafting the contract, I had neglected to include failure clauses. This turned out to bite me later on, when the customer repeatedly failed one contractual clause.
I then issued a notice of termination of the contract.
Years ago, when I took up project management courses, one of the things I learnt is to include: WHAT IS, and WHAT IS NOT. For example, in the case of the development of a product, state what the product do, and what the product doesn't do. I had successfully applied this lesson to contracts I've written, by stating what would be done, and what would not be done, so that boundaries are perfectly clear.
Since most of my consulting gigs were quite successful, I never had to learn the lessons listed above, until these two projects. Due to non-disclosure agreements, I'm unable to provide much details regarding these consulting gigs.
Nice one.
I think you (being a seasoned coder), can think of the contract like making sure your code is sound.
1) Catch all the exceptions,
2) Make sure the boundary values are well defined,
3) make sure no overflow, null pointers...and
4) don't forget your semi-colans, or else you will be hunting for the errors for a long time! :)
Im sure you can find more such similarities between coding and contracts :)
A method pointer is now the same as a global procedure, ie, procedure of object = procedure.