Making a crowdsourced project on Canvas - page 30

New comment
 
---:
Naive man.
The project lives and develops, generates income, so it has moved from being a crowdsourcer to a proprietary project.

Sadly, the project has gone into closed mode (

 
Алексей Барбашин:

It's sad that the project has gone into closed mode (

Draw a sketch of the gui you need and I will make it for you on kanvas. I will help you. And the project was doomed (if you understand the level of complexity of the task).
 
Реter Konow:
Draw a sketch of the gui you need and I'll make it for you on canvas. I will help you. And the project was doomed (if you understand the level of complexity of the task).

Peter, thank you very much for the offer! I will think about it. )) So far I'm coping on my own, like everyone else here.

 
Алексей Барбашин:

Peter, thank you very much for the offer! I will think about it. )) So far I have managed on my own, like everyone else here.

All within the bounds of testing. You help me test the markup language, I help you build the right interface on it and link it to the application. After that, I will give the language to the community for free, and everyone will build themselves a quality GUI on canvas. Why do I need it?
I would like to prove that individualism is more effective than collectivism.
2) I would like to prove that individualism is more effective than collectivism.)

Think about it.))
 
Реter Konow:
All within the framework of testing. You help me test the markup language, I help you build on it and link it to the application. After that, I will give the language to the community for free, and everyone will build quality GUI on canvas. Why do I need it?
1. At least there is some benefit to people from my work.
2. I want to prove that individualism is more effective than collectivism.)

Think about it.))

I don't even have a question why you need it, otherwise everyone here should ask each other )))).

Some people share their experiences, others share their insights, ideas, interesting solutions.

Peter, it's 2020, I guess your kernel is a procedural one? )) This is not a reproach or a drawback but a question.

We will reopen the question what is better and what is worse since it simply doesn't make sense. Any problem can be solved in many different ways, it's up to each individual to decide.

Well, your proposal I will still respond, I want to take part in the test. Further on in lss we will continue.

 
Алексей Барбашин:

I don't even have a question why you need it, otherwise everyone here should ask each other such a question )))).

Someone may share his experience, someone may share his experience, findings, thoughts, interesting solutions.

Peter, it's 2020, I guess your kernel is a procedural one? )) This is not a reproach or a drawback but a question.

We will reopen the question what is better and what is worse since it simply doesn't make any sense. Any problem can be solved in many different ways, it's up to each individual to decide.

Well, your proposal I will still respond, I want to take part in the test. More in lss we will continue.

1. Since I've already tested the language on several people's projects, I'd like to do the last stage of testing before publishing publicly, in this thread. An open-source project should have a logical conclusion. Let it be as follows.

2. Public testing will attract more people. They will learn how to work with the language and will be able to use it.

3. You don't risk anything, as the sketch of your interface will only be able to use your application. I don't need to see it or know it, but it won't prevent you from easily connecting the interface you've created.

4. You will provide drawings that I will use to create the gui. After that you will get the gui and a gui plug file. Then make sure everything works.

5. I will publish the constructor (an EA that understands markup language) and the exposed engine code (the part that handles gui events and dispatches them to the host application). As a result, anyone can plug in the engine as an inluder and get a single executable output that includes both gui and the user application. One executable.

SZZ. The technology is object-oriented at its core, although the form of implementation is non-standard. Exotic. Individualism has left its mark on it.))


 
Реter Konow:
1. Since I've already tested the language on several people's projects, I'd like to do the last stage of testing before publishing it publicly, in this thread. An open-source project should get a logical conclusion. Let it be as follows.

2. Public testing will attract more people. They will learn how to work with the language and be able to use it.

3. You don't risk anything, as the sketch of your interface will only be able to use your application. I don't need to see it or know it, but it won't prevent you from easily plugging in the interface you've created.

4. You will provide drawings that I will use to create the gui. After that you will get the gui and a gui plug file. Then, make sure everything works.

5. I will publish the constructor (an EA that understands markup language) and the open source code of the engine (the part that handles gui events and sends them to the user application). As a result, anyone can plug in the engine as an inluder and get a single executable output that includes both gui and the user application. One executable.

SZZ. The technology is object-oriented at its core, although the form of implementation is non-standard. Exotic. Individualism has left its mark on it.))


In the output you get an executable? Did I read it correctly?

 
Алексей Барбашин:

The output is an exe file? Am I reading this right?

Yes. Bottom line. Your application will plug my engine as an inliner, and inside it will be the core of your gui. The end result will be a single executable that you can put in the marketplace.

The builder produces the core of your gui as a file. You transfer the kernel to the engine (as an inline) and then the engine itself as an inline, plugged into your application. That's it.
 
Реter Konow:
Yes. Bottom line. Your app will plug my engine as an inline, and inside it will be the core of your gui. The end result will be a single executable that you can put in the marketplace.

Your gui core produces a constructor in the form of a file. You transfer it to the engine (as an inline) and then the engine itself as an inline, connect it to your application. That's it.

I must be misunderstanding the word "exeshnik". The way I see it, it's an executable file with exe extension. Since when does the market accept such files? They even accept dll applications. Of course I don't need to place anything there, but I still don't understand the structure of the proposed changes.

 
Алексей Барбашин:

I must have misunderstood the word "exeshtnik". My understanding is that it is an executable file with an exe extension. Since when does the market accept such files? They even accept dll applications. Of course I don't need to place anything there, but I still don't understand the structure of the proposed changes.

Let me rephrase: you will end up with one EA with interface, despite the fact that one part is done by me, and the other part is located on your site. This will not prevent the two parts from being put together into one EA.
1...232425262728293031323334353637...45
New comment