Debugging the DLL? In MT4 and MT5 - page 4
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
I cannot understand your pathological fear of mql and equally pathological (fanatical) trust in DLL.
If you are so convinced that "everything" can be hacked, what gives you a reason to exclude DLL from the list of "everything "?
I think the DLL is just as easy to break, hence the moral why invent a method to remove the tonsils through the anus.
Write everything in mql and no problem.
What do you mean break? Where, who will break? Me for myself? I don't understand why everyone only sees it from the position of selling grails to "fools". What's the catch here? If there is a way IMHO simpler - just take it straight and earn honestly, whether working for the order or for yourself. I do not understand why something should be protected from copying? Honestly.
What do you mean break in? Where, who is going to break? Me for myself? I don't understand why everyone only sees from the position of selling grails to "fools". What's the catch here? If there is a way IMHO simpler - just take it straight and earn honestly, whether working for the order or for yourself. I do not understand why something should be protected from copying? Honestly.
On the fourth forum as a couple of years ago was a branch in defense of the banned (started it now moderated Vinin) and in the heat of the dispute (and the dispute was about what to demand from the Metakvotov return to the category of unbanned) who gave the "resource this private and will be as MQ says, not as the party meeting decides". Everyone suddenly realized the invalidity of their arguments, and although the dispute went on for some time as a matter of habit, but it vanished of its own accord.
We can propose something, find bugs, but MQ will be responsible for making decisions. Renat will not say at the meeting of shareholders "Academic told me to do it", even if it is so, but the responsibility lies on him, not you.
So my advice to you slow down, you have been heard, it's okay, life goes on, let's keep coding.
Urain, fortunately, not everything is so unfortunate with the "master is master" mode.
Yes, we bend the line, we disagree and argue with traders and developers, but we often change our minds.
Urain, thankfully, is not all that sad about the "master is master" regime.
Yes, we bend the line, disagree, argue with traders and developers, but often change our minds.
The point is that you don't understand the needs and as a consequence, you stimulate both the transition to other platforms and their very creation.
Here you don't like that someone out there has created a reasembler for your code. Are there any objective reasons for discontent? I'm sure there are none. You just don't like it and that's all. That your sales will go down or something? What's the big deal? It only affects some pseudo-developers of some experts and indicators. Well, why should you care? Well, actually you may care, but why do you choose to deny traders the opportunity to debug the DLL and concern themselves with problems of these developers?
I repeat - if the security system in your terminal-server system is based on the fact that you can't re-submit due to commercial security? Then of course you have to do protection. But :) sorry :) then "it" will be hacked anyway. But then why do it. I don't understand it anymore. Explain what you hold to remove the ban and do not worry about resembler?
Explain, because I'm sure some people have already suspected you, quite possibly in vain, that you have some special good reason for it.
Urain, thankfully, is not all that sad about the "master is master" regime.
Yes, we bend the line, disagree, argue with traders and developers, but often change our minds.
And by the way you bend, you bend. But there is not much argument and argumentation from you.
By the way, you do bend. But you don't make many arguments and arguments.
HideYourRichess:
Шибче-шибче камлай.
I don't understand it anymore. You see something like that in yourself. I'm not being facetious. Do I need it?
I'm trying to figure out what's the point of prohibiting DLL debugging. But so far I haven't understood the logic of MQ as much as I try. Honestly, I am figuring it out from all sides. But I could not see any arguments myself and MQ does not explain anything.
Am I the only one who needs it? I do not understand, the rest are happy with whatever you give them. No well, maybe it makes sense to give your opinion, your arguments. But if I'm alone, then the hell with it. :)
I don't understand it anymore. You see something like that in yourself. I'm not being facetious. Do I need it?
I'm trying to figure out what's the point of prohibiting DLL debugging. But so far I haven't understood the logic of MQ as much as I try. Honestly, I am figuring it out from all sides. But I could not see any arguments myself and MQ does not explain anything.
I don't understand it anymore. You see something like that in yourself. I'm not being facetious. Do I need it?
I'm trying to figure out what's the point of prohibiting DLL debugging. But so far I haven't understood the logic of MQ as much as I try. Honestly, I am figuring it out from all sides. But I could not see any arguments myself and MQ does not explain anything.
Am I the only one who needs it? I do not understand, the rest are happy with whatever you give them. No well, maybe it makes sense to give your opinion, your arguments. But if I'm alone, then the hell with it. :)
I'm not happy with a lot of things and I'm talking about it, though I only argue until I get the answer "it won't happen because xxx and because yyyy".
Then I stop pushing the interlocutor leaving him the right to stick to his opinion.
How would you like to be yanked while manoeuvring in city traffic and have your sleeve tugged and told you to "go nowhere"?
It is better to tell you where to turn and let the driver decide for himself whether to turn or not.
Rosh:
Получается, что и двери закрывать на замки нет смысла - кому надо, все равно вскроют любой замок. Да и сигнализации ставить на машины не стоит - все равно угонят.
This does not seem to be an exact analogy. The lock acts as a protection factor against door burglary as a means of delay and signalling a burglary. But not as a means of protection. The means of protection here would be a safe.
The alarm system on a car is called an alarm system. If you mean the immobiliser, it's just a timing factor. Once the car is in the garage, there is nothing to protect it from thieves. But again, it is all a time delay and the police are the only protectors.
But this analogy doesn't work for the software, because "the thieves already have the car". The program is completely defenseless. And the main thing - as I have already written - the time factor is here only once. Further you just write a cracker and break without delay. One wonders if the price / sacrifice of such a dubious achievement is not high. Users leave for other platforms and there is no protection as there was no protection at all.