Debugging the DLL? In MT4 and MT5 - page 6
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
It won't because of the complexity of the code and because of the protection of course. In any case, it is all in our hands.
We will be fine with the compiler - we have plenty of power and capacity, and few in our field can boast of managed JIT in native 32/64 with a distributed testing environment on remote agents.
We have made a very safe and secure application environment for running other people's EAs (with DLL support disabled). This is a basic requirement for the creation of programming languages for trading systems. Basic, because we have to share the code for the community of users to grow. In this vein, we do our best to allow the MQL5 language to perform all calculations without DLL. Pure MQL5/EX5 is safe for distribution.
Without an actively supported community of traders, there will be no popularity of the language. For many years we technologically, informationally and financially support a huge number of traders who use our technology. It is in the support that our strength lies.
Some weak-willed developers of trading terminals are trying to catch up with cheap solutions like "we can write in C#/java, etc." but they do not get anything useful. Cheap technological input gives rise to equally cheap, fragmented and unsupported solutions. And the level of their subsequent support is clearly demonstrated by attempts to play the cheap "we support MQL4" game.
Keep an eye on our news - there will soon be very interesting news about the visual trading strategy tester. If everything goes well, it will be the bomb.
Anyway, we have not heard any arguments in favor of banning DLL debugging.
We have seen just another portion of just inspirational text. Aimed at the user.
But if you read it all as a general impression you'll see that "they've created a safe application environment". Hm, I somehow feel like I've seen it once before. And it doesn't feel like it. It feels like a rake. I mean, maybe MQ would benefit from the negative experience of those who have already tried it. You could look at C# and Java.
If you understand it as an argument like "but you will have such a safe environment". That's what I'm talking about - did you find out whether everyone needs it 100%?
I will NEVER make use of code without source code and I'm 100% sure 90% of people will NEVER run code without source code either. Or at least in a virtual machine.
So the question is who needs this achievement? It turns out that no one needs it but because of this DLL will be cancelled. That is, we cancel what everyone needs for the sake of what no one needs.
You could have taken a poll and asked if you needed a "safe environment" at the expense of a bunch of features not permitted because of it. Nope I don't, neither do the rest of us. Moreover, your hopes that the user will get used to it and will write everything only in your language, are 200% naive. This is a commercial software and individual scientific research. I can, and I've even stated that without the DLL, it's like there is no functionality for me.
In general, if you read those who hang out here as programmers for traders and as "troll forum promoters", then you are very wrong.
PS
The language itself and its environment will be further developed, special EX5 bit independent math libraries will appear (MA,DEV,FFT etc). using special processor commands, and possibly using vidocards). So, to write in pure MQL would be even more profitable.
At my spare time I'm working on the PDB format and maybe there will be a debugger for the plugins attached to the loadable EX5 DLL.
Already a long time ago....
A completely far-fetched problem, in my opinion. Simply put, there are two things that must be protected. First: the terminal itself, at least there should not be any possibilities of interception of control, code modification or espionage, for the benefit of third parties (let's call them that, bearing in mind that there are two sides, a client and a server). At the moment, the terminal is protected by one of the commercially available means. Moreover, the user programs are protected in the same way. Second: the exchange between server and terminal must be secured. This is also there. That is, in fact, all that is to be understood by protection. Talking about how everything is going to be hacked anyway and so on is all hypothetical stuff. They are usually made by people who have never tried to break anything themselves. The reality is that there is protection, and it meets whatever requirements there are. And that's fine, and there's nothing to spoil protection by letting debuggers get into the terminal's code (it's about debugging dlls).
The second point is not about "thinking about traders and protecting their work. There is a certain moment of distortion here. Objectively speaking, it's hard to accuse MQ of not "thinking about traders". They have created a great terminal, they develop it, support it, etc. And it, this terminal, costs traders nothing. That's one side of the business. The other side, and these are issues completely unrelated to the protection of the terminal:
You wrote: a trader cannot change the history of deals, but it's easy for a brokerage company to do that.
Here I also see the elements of an absolutely unfounded substitution of notions. Start with the fact that any brokerage company, in the broad sense, even regulated exchanges, can easily change their performance. There is nothing scary or criminal about that. This is just numbers in automated accounting system, which is managed by specific people. If people are decent (let's say), no one will change anything without a valid and legitimate reason. Well, if someone wants to play cards with cheats, there is nothing to complain about.
You wrote: protect against changes in the history of quotes, so that there is no dispute was a quote or not, and protection is effective enough to be accepted by any court...
This is a very broad and complicated topic, it probably has no place here. I will only say that if we are talking about betting, under the name of Russian forex - this thing is generally outside the Russian legal framework. Again, a lot depends on the "decency" of those on the other side of the terminal. The problem is that if you can go somewhere to complain and prove something with a lottery ticket number, you cannot go anywhere with "forex quotations" but to the garden. There is no such thing as forex in the law. This is a legal problem, not a terminal or MQ problem. If you really want to solve this problem, the way is clear. MP, legislative initiative, Duma subcommittee, debate in the Senate = Law => application to court, sessions, verdict.
You wrote: ban personal price manipulation against the trader...
Once again, MQ cannot ban unscrupulous DCs from manipulating prices. It just can't do it. Because they are not Judge Dread and Dirty Harry incarnate in one person, not Supreme Divine Justice, but just software developers. It all depends on the specific people in the dc, how they use that software.
You wrote: EDS . ..
What it is, I don't know.
In general. If we do not know about the EDS, we tend to joke about it on the stock exchanges. This needs to be understood clearly. We should clearly understand that even on regulated exchanges, suckers get screwed just like that.
You could take a poll to see if you need a "safe environment" at the expense of a bunch of banned features. Nope, I don't, neither do the rest of us. Moreover, your hopes that the user will get used to it and will write everything only in your language, are 200% naive. This is a commercial software and individual scientific research. I can, and I've even stated that without the DLL, it's like there is no functionality for me.
I will NEVER manipulate code without source code and I'm also 100% sure that 90% of people will NEVER run code without source code either. Or at least in a virtual machine.
So the question is who needs this achievement? It turns out that no one needs it, but because of this the DLL is canceled. That is, all that is necessary to all - we will abolish it for the sake of what no one needs.
Firstly, no one is cancelling the DLLs (or has the hysteria about cancelling MT4 number 2 started?).
Secondly, regarding DLL debugging:
1. There will be no debugging of DLL, and 1000 pages and 10000 of your arguments won't help, because the developers have expressed their position (even in ultimatum form);
2. For everyone who wants to take advantage of all the charms of debugging, the developers suggested writing everything in pure MQL5;
3. For all the rest, there are three options: a) move to other trading platforms, b) using emulator to debug DLL, c) write everything you need in MQL, debug it all, and only then transfer to DLL (while providing for all possible errors in MQL communication with this DLL).
Thirdly, I'm 100% sure that 95% of the people will use the built-in debugger for debugging the MQL code, and not for checking the functionality of the mythical DLL (which is mainly needed for communication with external software products).
Fourthly. How many people would dare to run a third-party DLL? I can already imagine that the answer will be something like "I do everything for myself, or pass the source code to the customer"...
Fifth. And why do you think the "Jobs" service is intended, and the more so why the "Store" is prepared (perhaps to share sources)?
Sixth. This trading complex was originally calculated (oddly enough) as a trading system, that allows the most efficient automatic or semi-automatic trading. Consequently there are a lot of programmers who use it with some success. Consequently, they have invested their efforts and creativity in code (scripts, indicators, Expert Advisors, etc.), which they offer for automated trading.
What about their rights? Or after the pirated "MS Windows" and "1C:Enterprise 7.7", which was not used only by the lazy one, we do not care about intellectual property?
HideYourRichess:
Меня, лично, защита устраивает. Так что, совет простой, прислушайтесь к нему - если вам что то не нравится в терминале - не пользуйтесь им, выберите себе другой, не мучайте себя. Да и мы отдохнём.
You are only speaking for yourself now. I'm sure there are more MQL5 programmers who want EX5 protection to be unbreakable (as much as possible). And as such, loading the terminal into a debugger is a MUST!
PS
The language itself and its environment will evolve, and special FAST math libraries will appear, independent of system bit rate (MA,DEV,FFT etc). using special processor commands, and possibly using vidocards). So, to write in pure MQL would be even more profitable.
At my spare time I'm working on the PDB format and maybe there will be a debugger for the plugins attached to the loadable EX5 DLL.
There is no need to poke around, gentlemen, it's 2010. The MS did it all a long time ago.
The answer is clear - I started to learn "that" terminal. Unfortunately for me, I have no other option.
First of all, no one is cancelling the DLLs (or has the hysteria about cancelling MT4 number 2 started?).
What about their rights? Or after the pirated "MS Windows" and "1C:Enterprise 7.7", which only the lazy have not used, have we no longer cared about intellectual property?
I am a programmer and I do not need your intellectual property.
I am a programmer and I create programmes for myself, as well as 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.
Dear moderators, is it possible to set a civilised framework from the start? I am not interested in listening to this kind of low-intellectual rudeness. Can't you make some kind of reprimand to this REQUIRED participant so that such posts from him will cease to be.
HideYourRichess:
You wrote: EDS . ..
What that is is not known to me.
In general. Instead of pouring out, though understandable, but completely unfounded negativity here, we should go from DTs to more regulated markets, at least to the exchanges. This needs to be understood clearly. And you have to clearly understand that even on regulated exchanges suckers are cheated just like that.
Look towards our state's requirements in EDS matters. As long as this nonsense continues, few will make solutions for Russia.
If you do not know what to do with MetaTrader 5, you should clearly understand that its security is much more powerful and convenient, than the homebrew Gosti.
PS
Our leaders, unfortunately, talk more about creating a big centre for trading on the stock and currency market. In reality our legislation is somewhere around the "Middle Ages" (average, because the stock market is somehow regulated)...