No difference, everything is for the money

Quote from: xeroc on January 10, 2016, 08:28:07 AM

Quote from: Samupaha on January 10, 2016, 08:10:22 AM
The demo/test network would help with this. Developers should have an easy way just to try things and mess around without losing money or fearing that they break something.

Since nobody seems to be interested in setting up a public test network, could it be done with worker proposal?

A private testnet is easily installed and documented in the docs

I think the point is regarding, testing and performance of functionality.

Then it goes back to a set of best practices on how to add extra functionality, and / or code reference. STEALTH was an example. I would prefer the original plugin quick mockup that was mentioned for crowdfunding (a while ago).

Quote from: Samupaha on January 10, 2016, 08:10:22 AM
The demo/test network would help with this. Developers should have an easy way just to try things and mess around without losing money or fearing that they break something.

Since nobody seems to be interested in setting up a public test network, could it be done with worker proposal?

A private testnet is easily installed and documented in the docs

The demo/test network would help with this. Developers should have an easy way just to try things and mess around without losing money or fearing that they break something.

Since nobody seems to be interested in setting up a public test network, could it be done with worker proposal?

Quote from: TravelsAsia on January 10, 2016, 04:50:37 AM

Quote from: betax on January 09, 2016, 03:04:48 PM
At the moment is very difficult to be a dapp developer, (in Bitshares) it is not just the learning curve, is the fact that you might be doing something wrong, any change will need to be heavily tested, including for performance. The EVM allows you to be sandboxed and protects the blockchain from this.

I thought if Plasma might be a candidate for this, but it is a completely different beast as it is a smaller blockchain to hold state, you still need the "contract" functionality. There are many ways that Ethereum and Bitshares can work alongside, even if both had EVMs as it will enrich the ecosystem. In another perspective another VM could be created, but following the anology of Sql Server + Sql I like the idea of having Solidity across many chains.

I still think the whole crypto ecosystem is very small, it will beneficial for an open collaboration and forum for the different chains.

Let's see a worker proposal for EVM.

How will that work in licensing terms?

Quote from: betax on January 09, 2016, 03:04:48 PM
At the moment is very difficult to be a dapp developer, (in Bitshares) it is not just the learning curve, is the fact that you might be doing something wrong, any change will need to be heavily tested, including for performance. The EVM allows you to be sandboxed and protects the blockchain from this.

I thought if Plasma might be a candidate for this, but it is a completely different beast as it is a smaller blockchain to hold state, you still need the "contract" functionality. There are many ways that Ethereum and Bitshares can work alongside, even if both had EVMs as it will enrich the ecosystem. In another perspective another VM could be created, but following the anology of Sql Server + Sql I like the idea of having Solidity across many chains.

I still think the whole crypto ecosystem is very small, it will beneficial for an open collaboration and forum for the different chains.

Let's see a worker proposal for EVM.

At the moment is very difficult to be a dapp developer, (in Bitshares) it is not just the learning curve, is the fact that you might be doing something wrong, any change will need to be heavily tested, including for performance. The EVM allows you to be sandboxed and protects the blockchain from this.

I thought if Plasma might be a candidate for this, but it is a completely different beast as it is a smaller blockchain to hold state, you still need the "contract" functionality. There are many ways that Ethereum and Bitshares can work alongside, even if both had EVMs as it will enrich the ecosystem. In another perspective another VM could be created, but following the anology of Sql Server + Sql I like the idea of having Solidity across many chains.

I still think the whole crypto ecosystem is very small, it will beneficial for an open collaboration and forum for the different chains.

Quote from: xeroc on January 09, 2016, 08:59:34 AM
I agrer with the OP and we need dapp developers aside from the core developers ..

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20856.msg269530.html#msg269530

I agrer with the OP and we need dapp developers aside from the core developers ..

Furthermore a graphene-js library would also be greaz and wr almost have something like it in the dl/ folder of the webwallet sources

Quote from: cass on January 08, 2016, 12:15:02 AM
With ETH u are able to deploy anything u want without an approval voting ... and Solidity is a high-level language whose syntax is similar to that of JavaScript ..
So they have a huge target developer audience they are able to reach with ..IMO this is a much lower barrier to entry .. as on BTS chain..

And with web3.js ethereum compatible JS API front end developers have a an easy way to play with ETH by integrating it into their JS client/server enviroments ..
IIRC, pls correct me if i'm wrong ... this is just my personal opinion .. just to say ..

Great points Cass.

https://bitsharestalk.org/index.php/topic,20821.msg269226.html#msg269226

With ETH u are able to deploy anything u want without an approval voting ... and Solidity is a high-level language whose syntax is similar to that of JavaScript ..
So they have a huge target developer audience they are able to reach with ..IMO this is a much lower barrier to entry .. as on BTS chain..

And with web3.js ethereum compatible JS API front end developers have a an easy way to play with ETH by integrating it into their JS client/server enviroments ..
IIRC, pls correct me if i'm wrong ... this is just my personal opinion .. just to say ..

Quote from: Riverhead on January 07, 2016, 11:21:04 PM

A lot of keys have been hit in anger about how centralized Bitshares is around CNX when compared to other projects. However I think there is the false confluence of businesses developing on a platform vs developing the platform.

As far as I can tell nearly every 2.0 project has a small core of dedicated platform developers and, especially in Ethereum's case, a ton of 3rd party developers ON the platform.

Are we really so different?

This is my impression, I don't know if it's correct and I don't speak code but BTS seems to have similar options for businesses that XCP/NXT/MSC have to varying degrees. The ability to launch a UIA with some adjustable parameters. (XCP+NXT+MSC = <$10 million) BTS is arguably a better blockchain but if you want to do much more than that then you need to be very knowledgable in Graphene/go through CNX.

Ethereum seems to allow businesses to write much more complex smart contracts/code that runs on the blockchain than just simple UIAs and which a wide group of developers seem to have the ability to do.

A lot of keys have been hit in anger about how centralized Bitshares is around CNX when compared to other projects. However I think there is the false confluence of businesses developing on a platform vs developing the platform.

As far as I can tell nearly every 2.0 project has a small core of dedicated platform developers and, especially in Ethereum's case, a ton of 3rd party developers ON the platform.

Are we really so different?