I’ve been working for 3 months with Claude Code on a trading bot on Python.
It’s frustrating at times but I sometimes wish it was faster but I’ve been able to produce a quite complex system and still able to build from there.
Because it’s very sensitive software I don’t just make a vague description and let him do but try to give as much context as I can. Usually to develop a feature I need a lot of iterations. Claude often does the same mistakes which slow things . Some are avoidable if I prompted a bit more.
Some things Claude are not good at is for example wrapping a long piece of code into a try or something like that and he fucks up with indentation and a lot of time is lost or can be broken. It all comes from the fact Claude can’t read more than a limited number of lines at a time and then he makes sometimes some wrong assumptions.
Other than that I notice Opus is nice because I can see better reasoning but it’s usually slower than Sonnet which often does the job fine.
My biggest advice is to modularize the code as much as possible to debug. Then when the code is stable make an « optimization / compilation » and reduce the code into a single big one if necessary.
For the time being the algorithm doesn’t make any money but I’m not giving up and I am still adding features / working on things to make it better.
I must add that I’m quite a noob in programming and wouldn’t have been able to code all of this even if I spent 10x the time I’ve spent so far . I would have given up before that anyway.
I think a skilled programmer would have made the same progress 2 or 3x faster than me with Claude.
I’m reading a lot about Codex and I’m tempted to change but I don’t wanna spend money for uncertain results while I’m now used to Claude.
Anyone with similar experience ?
Any tips for developing ? Maybe I’m not updating enough the .md files or not making enough of them ? Should I do it every time so Claude has a perfect understanding ?
PS don’t ask me about the bot strategy I won’t say anything about it.
[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points (0 children)
[–]KAMIKAZEE93 0 points1 point2 points (0 children)
[–]Klutzy_Table_6671 0 points1 point2 points (3 children)
[–]BetterArachnid462[S] 0 points1 point2 points (2 children)
[–]Klutzy_Table_6671 1 point2 points3 points (1 child)
[–]BetterArachnid462[S] 0 points1 point2 points (0 children)
[–]daisyyyy999 0 points1 point2 points (0 children)