Debugging the DLL? In MT4 and MT5 - page 7
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
You have been tactfully pointed out the possible solutions to your problem. All your grievances have been addressed and you have received answers. So, try not to repeat yourself, otherwise you will be banned for flooding.
Ban? I only repeat the questions that no one has answered for me. And I'm not even repeating them, I'm clarifying them.
Flood, it's pointless for the sake of some pointless process postings. I was trying - or rather I have tried - to convince you that my position is correct. I gave arguments. No one gave me any counter-arguments.
What do we have in the end? What arguments have WHICH nobody managed to bring back to me and nothing worthwhile? ... Although, um, it seems to me that even to bring them back again is completely pointless, because there must be some other argument from MQ, which outweighs all these arguments. But no one is actually presenting it here. That is why the situation looks at least strange - all reasonable people are puzzled - but MQ stands his ground.
OK, so it is - and if I had known that the reason for it is not so users, there would be no topic.
So that's the end of the topic, thanks for the answers.
On the subject of everyone's favourite EDS (as I understand an electronic digital signature), the developers have already said more than once. Their statement (if I am not mistaken about bank VTB 24) sounded something like this: About EDS implementation time
With EDS in MetaTrader 5, everything is fine - check the box on the server and another level of authorization is added using SSL certificates (RSA 1024 or 2048 bits). SSL certificate (*.pfx) is saved on client's side (in registry or on disk) and can be used for signatures or authorization in other services, like trader's cabinet.
It was the same in 4, but simpler and without direct SSL compatibility. But in practice few brokers enabled this mode.
all reasonable people are perplexed - and MQ stands his ground.
What is the reasonableness of your perplexity?
You want a DLL, use it, why do you think we MUST give you its debugging?
What arguments have you made?
1) I give you my code.
2) I, don't use someone else's experts with DLL.
3) Someone can easily break any protection. (at least you don't mean yourself, although I have my doubts here too)
Dear Academic,
In reality, you have tried to explain your reasons in a polite way, without getting to clear language that puts everything firmly in its place.
You are now trying to teach practitioners who have been developing the MQL language (first introduced in the MetaQuotes platform) since 2001. Over 9 years we have consistently developed MQL - MQL2 - MQL4 and MQL5 in public discussions on our forums. The level of programming languages for trading strategies is very deep and is based on our practical experience with many mistakes.
On this background, you appear and based on your own I/MNE, you are fighting for the tip of the iceberg, demanding explanations and not understanding the underlying mechanisms that affect the system development. The situation is a lot like a confident third grader demanding that the professor turn the world around for himself because he thinks that is the right thing to do. The cocky tone of "Professor, you can't even explain why the world isn't for me!" merely puts the finishing touches to the picture.
I have to explain in this way, for I am not going to lecture on how to build information and trading platforms, what is important in this, where the fatal failures are and where success is.
On all loved EDS (as I understand an electronic digital signature) developers have already expressed more than once. Their statement (if I am not mistaken about the bank VTB-24) sounded something like this - About the time of EDS
EDS? So it seems to be implemented in a terminal. Physically. At least one of its reincorporations. As far as I understand, everything is not all right with these EDSs at the level of legislation. Some kind of complication there, hmmm.
Our leaders, unfortunately, talk more about creating a major centre for stock and currency market trading. In reality, our legislation is somewhere around the "Middle Ages" (average, because the stock market is somehow regulated)...
You want the DLL, use it, why do you think we MUST give you its debugging?
Of course you don't have to. The question is why exactly you don't have to, but something else does ;-). The best thing would really be to make decisions based on open user voting, so that everyone can see who needs what functionality and features, and how many such people there are. As long as MQ makes decisions in closed mode and only mentions hypothetical advocates of this or that feature - the validity of decisions is not seen.
As a matter of fact, it has already been said many times - no matter how hard MQ tries, it will never manage to create a professional development tool comparable to the real development environments available on the market (you may disagree, but this is a given, and your position doesn't change the situation). This is why DLL development would be in demand, and so would debugging. Debugging in some self-written emulator is hardly equal to debugging in a real host application, plus all the costs of its writing are passed on to the user. In this sense, for someone it would be more convenient (how many of them we'll probably never know ;-)) not to have MQL layer, and MQ provide some client API which is available "directly" for integration with external programs.
...
I am a programmer and I do not need your intellectual property.
I am a programmer and I create software both for myself and to order and for sale. I always pass on the source code. That is, I do not understand (fortunately) I do not understand (I thought so before too) what those who protect their programs want (evidently from the stupidity). As it is useless.
But the conversation is pointless - you can not beat sovok. Alas.
I am also a programmer, and I also write programs for myself and on request, and also periodically resort to the services of DLL. And at least a lot of things I implemented in DLL for trading systems (MQL had not had necessary functionality before, and there were decompilers for ex4 on every corner on the web)...
But agree that sending the source code to the customer is not a standard or mandatory procedure. And the cost of such work should be many times higher.
And those who protect their programs want to banal simple - they though earn on a living and feed the family at the expense of their work (not thinking that their work in the form of a code on the contrary to their will can be someone replicated).
PS
And in conclusion about uselessness of protection, I have not in vain mentioned earlier "MS Windows" and "1C:Enterprise 7.7" (and as a programmer I think you will be interested and understand my next example).
We will not talk about our favorite operating system, it is already clear that compared to the similarly functional version of Linux, it is a VIRUS and ONE BIG Hole for intruders to enter the PC.
Let's take a look at two products for accounting, namely the well known and loved by all accountants "1C:Enterprise 7.7" and "TurboBookkeeping 6.9" from DIC.
Both companies are Russian, both produce accounting software, both products have a hardware-software key (as a means of protection), both products have their own built-in languages.
But the product from 1C in pirate form is on every corner (still. Probably already 8 version can get if you want) and only the lazy one in his time it has not used, but the TB in a pirate version I did not meet (neither 6.7, nor 6.9). Although I'm familiar with these programs for about 10 years.
Of course you don't have to. The question is why exactly this is something you don't have to and something else you do ;-). The best thing would really be to make decisions based on open user voting, so that everyone can see who needs what functionality and features, and how many such people there are. As long as MQ makes decisions in closed mode and only mentions hypothetical advocates of this or that feature - the validity of decisions is not seen.
Also, I believe that the MQ Provisional Government should be overthrown by the revolutionary masses of Bolshevik soldiers and sailors as well as cooks and janitors. Yep.
As a matter of fact, it has already been said many times - no matter how hard MQ tries, it will never be able to create a professional development tool comparable to the real development environments available on the market (you may disagree, but it's a given and your position doesn't change the situation). This is why DLL development would be in demand, and so would debugging. Debugging in some self-written emulator is hardly equal to debugging in a real host application, plus all the costs of its writing are passed on to the user. In this sense, someone would be more convenient (how many of them we probably will not know ;-)) not to have a layer in the form of MQL, and that MQ provided some client API, accessible "directly" for the integration with external programs.
I'd like to see a list of "real development environments available on the market". And a short annotation of what their "realness" is.
And the protection will of course be broken. Let's make a poll - for how long. ;-)
Let's see how long it would take you to do it. You don't need any surveys, do it, show a high level of class.
You are now trying to teach practitioners who have been developing the MQL language (first introduced in the MetaQuotes platform) since 2001. Over 9 years we have consistently developed MQL - MQL2 - MQL4 and MQL5 in public discussions on our forums. The level of programming languages of trading strategies is very deep and is based on our practical experience with many mistakes.