MAHMOUD SAMIR wrote: > Hi > > "At some point a person will HAVE to write code because they will reach > the limits of the software. Either that or your software will turn into > a hairy, unmaintainable beast. Maybe someday software development will > be point-and-click, but as long as people want to do custom stuff, it > isn't going to happen." > > This was the case before RPWI Technology which embedded inside DoubleS > Framework > RPWI (Real/Rapid Programming without Instructions/Code) comes with new > tricks that let > the Programmer/Developer develop any kind of Systems/Applications without > limitations using (Programming) without code. > there are new (16) tricks behind RPWI Technology , these tricks make RPWI > Technology full solution for programming , no need to return to the code > again. > > "What you seem to want to do has been done before. It is called RAD > (Rapid Application Development) and the closest I've seen to actual RAD > that works more or less is Delphi. VB isn't quite RAD (IMO), but it has > a very large following that, amazingly, is a cut-n-paste- n-share coding > community." > i studied RAD and used it before inviting the RPWI Technology, i know about > ------------------------------------------------ > 1 - Code Bank > 2 - Code Generator > 3 - Wizard > 4 - Designers > 5 - Interactive IDE > 6 - Reusable Framework > 7 - Package > 8 - Template > 9 - Components > 10- Triggers > ------------------------------------------------ > RPWI Technology is not any of them.
Uh huh. Allow me to be the skeptic. At some point someone, somewhere will have to write code. If you plan for every possible scenario in advance, your application will become an unwieldy, hairy beast. > "I downloaded your documentation and, based on what I see, the app. is > clearly designed by a programmer, not a software developer" > Yes, i am programmer , familar with developer tools. And you just completely missed the point. Let me put this in simpler terms: Programmers != Software developers. You are clearly a programmer. > " Programmers may have the best intentions but rarely do they think about > how the > end-user is going to interact with the application." > The user of my framework should be (Programmer) or (Developer) - and should > know much > about the new though before using it (Learning curve is high - because the > though is new, so new) You won't get many takers. > "Your dialogs and GUI are non-standard and the terminology is probably > familiar to you but > would be quite confusing to the average user." > it's expected that the terminology will be quite confusing to the average > user - because all of > the terminology are *new* - with differnet meaning that may be expected , > <snip> And you, once again, missed the point. > " You've also made moving through the environment very difficult with > useless message boxes that have one button and commentary on your dialog > titles." > fixing like this problems will done by the time , through framework users > feedback > > "Now this isn't saying that RAD is not useful. VB, for example, is > really good at doing database stuff with point-n-click ease." > my framework - not new RAD tool, it's ESP (Easy Software Programming) tool Let me reiterate: At some point someone, somewhere WILL have to write code. > " Your main GUI is already at a 60MB download and it just doesn't seem very > useful. > You need to showcase the tool by showing actual applications being > developed... and I'm not talking about the cheesy "hello world" app." > The usage of my framework is not to develop new applications directly. > The usage of my framework is to develop new programming language of new > generation > (Interactive Language - based on Programming without coding) > Then you can also use the framework to test the developed language through > developing application using it. > > Interactive Languages that are based on programming without coding, is not > limited, and it's not more that GUI for a programming language that we know > like (C/C++,C#,Java,Python,VB,VFP,xHarbour,Delphi,...etc) > This GUI are in Human Language (English,French,Arabic,..etc) > > Programmer/Developer ---> GUI (Human Language) ---> Interactive Language > -----> Programming language(Code) ----> Compiler -----> Linker ------> > Machine Language (Executable or Library) You do realize programming using "human language" has been attempted before. It was called COBOL. > Instead of using Code Editor to write code, we uses a Goal Designer to > develop applicationg using programming without coding > > Goal Designer, Remove all the limitations and let us do what we want to do > , without restrictions So...if I told your tool I want the goal to be 'to conquer and rule the galaxy', will it automatically generate the necessary computer program to do it? -- Thomas Hruska CubicleSoft President Ph: 517-803-4197 *NEW* MyTaskFocus 1.1 Get on task. Stay on task. http://www.CubicleSoft.com/MyTaskFocus/
