My approach. The core is the engine. - page 117

New comment
 
Controlled is when you do whatever you want inside the block, and Bazed is totally cool when you go into Assembler.
 
Maxim Kuznetsov:

Kernel-engine based products are NOT allowed to be sold on the market under current market rules.

On common sense, you can't use the "kernel-engine" in your software either. There is no release, there is no versioning, no compatibility control, there is nothing...There is a Peter who will crank out an interface that will be nailed to some crap that must be searched through 200 pages of forum.

That's how Windows wasn't built in the first place. But if we find an uncle and aunt in Dell (for example) atRetrog Konow, we will all be sitting on its engine. After all, Uncle Bill was trolled with his operating system in every way... 40 years have passed, where is Bill and where are those who trolled him)).

 
Unicornis:

Windows wasn't built in the beginning either. If wefind an uncle and an aunt at Dell (for example), we will all be sitting on his engine. After all, Uncle Bill as much as anyone could troll his operating system ... 40 years have passed, where is Bill and where are those who troll him)).

Bill used OOP even back then.

 
Dmitry Fedoseev:

Bill used OOP even back then.

Of course, otherwise we would have been waiting for Windows to load for half an hour and there would have been no development whatsoever, we would still be sitting on win 3.1 at most)))

 
Dmitry Fedoseev:

Bill was even using OOP back in the day.

Poor Bill.

 
Алексей Тарабанов:

Poor Bill.

I don't know how it stressed him out, but the fact is that it's convenient to use.

 
Реter Konow:

George, you won't understand anything until you try it. If you need a GUI, make sketches and post them.

Peter, can't you see that my claim is significantly different from the rest?

The key word in your phrase is "needs".

The main problem of your product, in my opinion, is the lack of target audience. I don't need GUI. Moreover, I'm sure that everyone who works in a "semi-automatic" mode like "I log in, and the Expert Advisor accompanies the transaction, if anything happens - I close it.

GUI is necessary only for those who are used to watching quotes, manually opening-accompanying-closingpositions every three to five minutes. And, he must have a pretty good understanding of programming (remember, you said about a "complex Expert Advisor"). How many of these people are there?

And you're talking about "treating them like a toy" - this is the stuff of fantasy. Not only are such people extremely few, but they all want the "royal path in geometry", and if there is no such a path, they don't need it at all.


Peter, you are doing something that many people are interested in, but no one needs. That is the main problem with your library.

 
Yuriy Asaulenko:

You shouldn't laugh. The Grails have been invented here for years, and no one laughs. And Peter does a perfectly realizable thing and everyone laughs. Miracles.

By the way, yes.

I also don't understand people - everyone is picking on the realization itself, though it's quite normal. Yes, it is a bit unusual, and, I suspect, very difficult to support and change, but, nevertheless, it fulfills its task quite well.

The main problem isn't that it's impossible, with Peter's memory and workability - I wouldn't be surprised if 3d came along soon.

The main problem is who needs it all?

 
Georgiy Merts:

...

The main problem is who needs it all ?

  1. Necessity arises after with the product, not before it. A television, for instance. A man in the 19th century did not know what a television set was. No matter how much you explained to him why he needed a TV, he wouldn't understand you. You'd draw a TV set with chalk, little people inside it, theatre, with little people behind the glass. The little people running, talking, shooting, but they're not really there... Imagine how ridiculous it would have looked to 19th century people. You wouldn't be understood and the idea of television would be rejected outright.
  2. Next, you'd take a time machine to bring a television to the 19th century. Showed people the movies. News. And then, you'd start giving away televisions for free. That's when people would understand why TV is needed.

Need arises after interacting with a thing.

To become useful, a thing has to fulfil several criteria:

  1. The thing must arouse curiosity. This is the first step towards interaction.
  2. It must be unusual. It must be striking. An eye-catcher. That's the second step to interaction.
  3. It has to be comfortable. Useful. Multifaceted (so that learning is a process). This is a step towards pulling into interaction.
  4. A person has to develop a conscious attitude towards the thing. An attitude is already an interaction.
After these stages there is no question about the necessity of the thing. Necessity has already emerged. Things are just needed, that's all.

 
Georgiy Merts:


Human nature is above the market. Moreover, it defines it.

I adjust to human nature, not market nature.

That is why I think the question of necessity is meaningless.

It is human nature to accept the necessity of anything. The need for the new is inherent in it. Look around you. Millions of previously unnecessary things have become necessary. Why?

Because it's human nature.

And it is constant.

1...110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124...184
New comment