Troll Technology (QT) Releases Scripting Language 64
OopChugALug writes "Troll Tech last night released a beta of QSA, which stands for QT Scripting Language for Applications.
Download here. As a business apps developer for a major financial institution's trading floor, I know the traders will love this. Hopefully, with QSA, I can get rid of Excel, and give the traders Spreadsheet widgets, with the flexibility of a 'VBA-like' scriptability to boot!"
When hell freezes over, pigs fly, et cetera. (Score:4, Funny)
Yes, yes, very likely!
Re:When hell freezes over, pigs fly, et cetera. (Score:3, Insightful)
just what we need (Score:2, Interesting)
Not only is it yet another scripting language, there is no documentation on their site!
Joe
http://josephgrossberg.blogspot.com [blogspot.com]
Re:just what we need (Score:5, Insightful)
It's based on ECMAscript [trolltech.com], so it's not really learning a whole other language. This was smart on TrollTech's part - no one's interested in learning a whole other language just to interface with pretty widgets. This'll make it very accessible to a lot of developers.
Should open up some interesting possibilities for KDE, too.
Re:just what we need (Score:1)
You obviously didn't download it either, the docs are there. Stop whining and download it if you're really interested.
Re:just what we need (Score:1)
I'm not whining. I'm just saying that if you are releasing a new language, you need to attract developers. If you want to attract developers, you need to make the things they need (e.g. documentation), readily available.
Re:just what we need (Score:1)
Re:just what we need (Score:2)
They should make the documentation readily available and easily accessible. That way, it will encourage people to download it.
Before I download something, I want to make sure it's useful and worth my time. I don't just go around downloading programs, and *then* seeing what they are.
For applications, this means a feature list and screenshots. For languages, this means documentation I can (easily find and) browse online.
wxWindows (Score:2)
wxWindows: wxPython, wxBasic, wxLua (Score:3, Informative)
Nothing beats wxPython for what you want to do.
There is even wxLua (a very fast light scripting language) and wxBasic for the fanatics of that language.
Re:wxWindows: wxPython, wxBasic, wxLua (Score:2, Informative)
There are also python & ruby bindings to qt just like with wxWindows.
Re:Released, really? (Score:3, Informative)
And I'm not really convinced that it's better, unless you think only in KDE.
Anyway, wxWindows already has several scripting language bindings. (I forgot wxPerl too)
Re:Released, really? (Score:1)
Commercial free software (Score:1)
QT is not free if you want to do commercial applications.
Trolltech's Qt is free for use in commercial [gnu.org] free software such as Red Hat's distribution of KDE, or any other boxed distribution of a GPL'd application.
Re:Released, really? (Score:1)
The only modern cross-platform API I've come accross is gtkmm. Know of any others?
Re:Released, really? (Score:2)
The reason QT has its own string class is for cross-platform compatability. Standard strings on different platforms may behave oddly, while a QT-standard string object helps to achive the whole "write once, compile anywhere" goal.
Speaking of reinventing the wheel, how about GTK implementing its own OO environment on top of C? Last time I checked, there was a very good one called "C++".
</FANBOY>
Re:Released, really? (Score:1)
Hopefully (Score:4, Insightful)
Are you?
Re:Hopefully (Score:3, Insightful)
What's unusual is that this guy (story's original author) thinks that he's going to get the said traders to move away from Excel. Yeah, that will happen when Enron regains its credibility as a market maker. I got news for him. The traders drive the trader-support tools. He should think to stop using excel *after* the traders start asking him to stop using excel.
All traders everywhere use Excel. All Risk depts everwhere use Excel. A majority of quant modeling is done with excel.
Please post any exceptions below, because I'm interested in knowing who doesn't use excel.
A final point is that VBA for Excel is highly polished and the best currently available. It's very easy to code and compile C++ DLLs that directly link into Excel through VBA. A lot of people are doing this, there's a lot of information available, .net promises to make this even easier to do, and there's little reason to switch to something different.
Re:Hopefully (Score:4, Funny)
No wonder why they use Excel. :)
--
Evan "Thinks Word 97 is the best WP to date, but not a fan of Excel"
Re:Hopefully (Score:1)
Re:Hopefully (Score:2)
Plus excel runs neither on commercial unix nor IBM motherfuckin' mainframes, so lots of banks won't use it for anything mission critical. Traders tend to be tech-savvy, and here (City) insist on APL on Unix on their desktops -
Most of the quants I know use an APL2 family language like Saxon APL or an asciified derivative thereof like K.
2D is all that you need for traders' on-screen analysis. It is simple, quick, down-and-dirty, and gets the job done. If you are doing anything with even close to 65535 rows, or if you need a 3+ Dimensional data structure then you need to reevaluate your model and your decision to use Excel. There are many tools (Matlab, SAS, C++, Perl) that better suited for large data sets. Pricing Options, Derivitaves and Bonds doesn't require these models.
With regard to banks using Excel. I was refering specifically to supporting traders in investment banks. I'm not sure what is run serverside, but I hope it is mission critical. I know that *all* of the quants and risk analysts that I know use excel. Some of them have Sun compute servers with SAS and Matlab, but Excel is the dominant tool and the tools that they develop for traders *have* to work in excel.
You say that you work at city. Do you mean Citi? (Citigroup). If this is the case, your misspelling makes me doubt that you really work in the finance industry.
Re:Hopefully (Score:2)
You're right. Excel may be far less prevalent elsewhere in the world, although I can't imagine what might take its place. I would be interested in knowing.
Re:Hopefully (Score:1)
You say that you work at city. Do you mean Citi? (Citigroup). If this is the case, your misspelling makes me doubt that you really work in the finance industry.
He means exactly what he wrote. He works in "The City" which means London City, The Square Mile...
--
The K Language (Score:3, Informative)
My quick intro: http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2002/11/14/22741/791 [kuro5hin.org]
A wiki entry written by David Ness: http://www.c2.com/cgi/wiki?KayLanguage [c2.com]
Re:Hopefully (Score:4, Informative)
Um..I work with a trading desk every day. Some of it is in-house, much of it isn't. There's a huge list of vendors that supply trading desk applications. Many of them sell software with Excel plugin capability. Bloomberg and Bridge come to mind. And you're right, why in the world would you switch away from Excel.
Regardless of all that, if one of our developers downloaded an obscure scripting language with no support and started rolling out custom applications I'm pretty sure we'd escort him to the door on the spot. Things like compliance, due diligence, split second transaction accountability, Business Recovery, transparency, etc all mean you can't just toss out whatever widgets you like. Can you imagine rolling out trade balancing tools to a trading desk writting in unsupported language 'Foo', and then putting in your 2 week notice?
Re:Hopefully (Score:2, Interesting)
I submitted the article, and believe me, it will be a hard task to ween traders off of Excel - if even possible. I plan on rolling out parallel versions of the software I am producing - and we'll see which "version" the traders like better. I believe I will be able to flex and bend to the trader's whims more adeptly with QT/QSA, but we'll see. Excel will not be abandoned by any means, but if it is used to a lesser extent, than this will be making some headway.
Often, we just can't do things in Excel that we would like, with the control and protection we desire. Likewise, we find that traders often find "hard-coded" GUIs, without any scripting language or ability to customize the appearance to be lacking in flexibility as well.
I've written Excel DLL's for a long time, and believe me, I'm no fan of Microsoft's underlying API for exporting VBA variables / types back and forth to C / C++ DLL land.
Do you think APIs such as SafeArrayAccessData(...) or structures such as SAFEARRAYS and VARIANTs are elegant? Ever try passing nested structs that contain arrays of nested structs of unsigned numbers or BSTRings back and forth between C and VBA? I think the Microsoft APIs for doing this and the Microsoft documentation is crap. IMHO, the QT documentation looks clearer.
Additionally, I've been extremely impressed with QT as a GUI toolkit -unlike MFC/Win32 (or the complexity of COM). As far as support, we are planning on buying quite a few developer licenses / support from Troll tech. The price is not an issue and we like the license terms.
As far as "Things like compliance, due diligence, split second transaction accountability,...etc", you would be surprised how much traders mix in their own models/ calculations with programmer-built tools - With Excel, it's a real problem keeping software under control. I can't see how it could be worse with QT. Should be interesting....
Cheers,
Dave Linenberg (OopChugALug)
Re:Hopefully (Score:2)
Exactly! Suppose ibank A is pricing a complicated instrument. If their software took two weeks to quality check and verify, then ibank B would do the software in two days and purchase/sell the instrument before ibank A could ever get to it. What if ibank B makes a mistake in their software that ibank A doesn't make? Well, ibank B will more than cover their losses during the next two weeks when they roll out 7 new packages for pricing 7 new instruments and ibank A is still working on the first instrument.
Re:Hopefully (Score:1)
The only one that didn't have perl or python insisted on everything in C++. They didn't have *any* C++ programmers, so that the C++ code was effectively unsupported!
In reality, the biggest problem is that Traders are well versed in Excel, and I have met many of them that don't understand what other applications a PC could possibly want. They can be spotted writing letters to their clients in Cell A1.
These traders are wrong, since in reality, behind them is a large mass of (semi) automated order processing, settlement and confirmation systems, most of which are mainframe/minicomputer based, or n-tier client server. You *can't* do that with Excel.
Margins are low in investment banking now, and firms are being pushed to cut costs, especially in IT. Traders are no longer able to swing their big swinging dicks and get what they want. They will get what they are given, and that will start to be the cheapest option -- the spreadsheet widget is a possible flyer.
Admittedly, the quants do design their pricing models in spreadsheets, but this is a prototype, since to trade whatever it is has been designed, the same model must be implemented in the big iron trading systems. The rest of the universe uses excel for looking at data.
ANOTHER scripting language? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:ANOTHER scripting language? (Score:1)
Well, there kind of already are - there are python bindings (PyQT [riverbankcomputing.co.uk]) for, oh, everything really, and doubtless perl and ruby bindings too. You need an interpreter for whichever of these languages you want to run, and you need the relevant packages, plus ideally some documentation and you're ready to go.
Having said that, I think ECMA-script is a good base for scripting functionality - I've thought for a while that it's just too good to spend its whole life servicing pop-ups and roll-overs, and it's good to see that SVG, for instance, will eventually be scriptable via ECMA-script and the DOM. I've used JScript, MS's ECMA-script implementation, with the Windows Scripting Control before now to script the behaviour of COM components, and found it greatly preferable to VBScript - much more dynamic, much better error handling (try...catch...finally, with objects throwable as exceptions), much better array-handling and so on. I haven't tried using it for a larger-scale project, and would probably resort to Python if I wanted to build a full-blown application, but for quick and dirty scripting it's a real gem.
Troll Technology (Score:5, Funny)
case FP:
? FP[Rnd]
case Soviet:
reverse(HeadLine)
? "in soviet russia, $1 $2es you!"
case Ascii:
for (!filtered)
? Rand_Art
case ReadArticle:
restate(wrongly+inflammatoryDeclaration)
case !ReadArticle:
restate(wrongly+inflammatoryDeclaration)
case Beo:
? "imagine a beowulf cluster of $1"
case AYB:
? "All your $1 are belong to $2"
Re:Troll Technology (Score:2, Funny)
Re:Troll Technology (Score:3, Funny)
? "case switches YOU!"
The progress of software development (Score:1)
Re:Yes! YASL (Score:1)
How wonderful (Score:2)
But back to the PHP thing, PHP looks like perl and smells like perl but it ain't perl and if you try to pretend it is it doesn't work out way too much of the time. What does this scripting language look like, and why did we need another one? Why couldn't they have just plugged something good which already existed in to that place? Troll is determined to reinvent every wheel possible where gnome is trying to do things in the best of established ways, as far as I can tell. I don't use either any more (Devotee of XP on the desktop) so I'm not keeping up with every detail but that's my broad impression.
Re:How wonderful (Score:2)
Erm... (Score:2)
Re:Erm... (Score:2)
Egg on face for this reason, not the sibling to your comment :P