Well, rickyjames, I think you are a pretty confident guy, do you want to be also a leader on a stage?  

yes, but we need to find a very useful/needed use case for average people to use AE. And it must be a very specific use case, not only some theoretical examples. The average people doesn't care that it could sell its stocks using AE if it would be a company.

The dialog should be like this:
We: With NXT and its AE you can do <some specific, really useful stuff in the daily life>, bam!
People: Really? I can do that with NXT? How can I get some NXT?

The other possibility is to find use cases for businesses that attracts their customers to use NXT.

Well, sharing is always welcome, but I don't use windows

I will try to implement/use/test some scripts or tools to perform such tests during the weekend. I guess you are the "tulip"-guy on the testnet?
did you use a script to place these 100 orders?

I'm in talk with l8orrie, maybe we could use the base of his FreeRider to create a tool that performs some automatic tests, including "special cases" and performance tests. Maybe even use it for continuous regression tests of the complete NXT core?

Maybe, will try during the weekend. To really test the core, we should not use the great frontends/web clients, because often they already prevent the input of the "interesting" values (like 0 or negative amounts). We need to test directly the core apis with such special values. Is this possible with FreeRider? Didn't test it yet.

exactly. "unexpected" tests could involve also multiple bid, sell AND CANCEL orders, all at the same time (in the same block), involving also buys and sells from the same account ("I buy my own Peanuts, which I cancelled at the same time")

AE (0.8.7) looks pretty good and stable. I made following pretty "complicated" test that involves multiple characteristics of the AE order matching algorithm in one test case. If such test cases succeed, we can be pretty sure that all the simple functions involved work as intended.

The test case was the following:
3 Accounts involved, account A and B are sellers of "Peanuts", account C is a buyer of "Peanuts", they sell and buy different amounts for different prices.

Possessions before trade:
Account A: 1000 NXT, 2000 Peanuts
Account B: 500 NXT, 5000 Peanuts
Account C: 2000 NXT, 1000 Peanuts

Offers:
A makes a sell offer: 300 Peanuts, Price: 2 NXT, Fee: 1 NXT
B makes a sell offer: 200 Peanuts, Price: 1 NXT, Fee: 1 NXT
C makes a buy offer, 350 Peanuts, for 3 NXT each, Fee: 3 NXT

The AE Order matching algorithm assumes (correctly) that a buyer wants to buy as cheap as possible. So, C buys 200 Peanuts from B for 1 NXT each (200 NXT total), and 150 Peanuts from A for 2 NXT each (total 300 NXT).

Final possessions after trades:
Account A: 1000 NXT + 300 NXT - 1 NXT (fee) = 1299 NXT,
   2000 Peanuts - 150 Peanuts = 1850 Peanuts
Account B: 500 NXT + 200 NXT - 1 NXT (Fee) = 699 NXT,
   5000 Peanuts - 200 Peanuts = 4800 Peanuts
Account C: 2000 NXT - (200*1 NXT) - (150*2 NXT) - 3 NXT (Fee) = 1497 NXT
   1000 Peanuts + 200 Peanuts + 150 Peanuts = 1350 Peanuts

And finally, there is still a sell offer active from account A about 150 Peanuts for 2 NXT each.

Additionall, the total amount of Peanuts before and after the trades must be the same:
before: 2000 + 5000 + 1000 = 8000 Peanuts
after: 1850 + 4800 + 1350 = 8000 Peanuts

Also the amount of NXT must be the same, minus the fees:
before: 1000 + 500 + 2000 = 3500 NXT
after: 1299 + 699 + 1497 = 3495 NXT (5 NXT are "lost" as fees)

This testcase succeeded!
We should do some additional similar testcases, creating also scenarios where orders are cancelled at the same time (in the same block) when they would be fulfilled

jep, thx

cc001 14982679201235752929

ok, let me know if you need more info or specific testing

No, then it's not that bug, maybe a new/unknown one? I get {"balance":1475210,"effectiveBalance":1900,"unconfirmedBalance":1321550} for account 14982679201235752929

http://holms.cloudapp.net:6874/nxt?requestType=placeAskOrder&secretPhrase=XXXX&asset=16656868189198801021&quantity=10&price=1&fee=1&deadline=1440
gives {"errorCode":6,"errorDescription":"Not enough funds"}, but I own these 10 "Blubs"

What's the api call to get how many of a specific asset I own?

Update: similar strange behavior also with asset "Blubb2" (assetid 4246603043373483850) and Account Number 7744741704652453843

I traded them a few times between these two accounts, made multiple bid and ask orders and cancelled them again before they were confirmed

thx

CfB: Is this a known bug:
I issued 10 Blubs and made a sell offer for all 10 Blubs (worked). Then I cancelled this offer.
Now I try to make again the same sell offer, and now I get the "Not enough funds" error

yup, could it also be an issue with the different values "balance"/"effectiveBalance"/"unconfirmedBalance" ?

have probably the same issues, but I'm not sure if it is related to the web client...

me 2, please 14982679201235752929

please make an offer

I made quite a few trades, sell and buy offers, issued assets (Peanuts).
I reported some minor bugs and improvements to wesleyh (related to the client). Sometimes it is difficult to distinguish between client and core functionality/bugs. Testing the core is probably more effective when it is done by the client developers, because for end users, there is always the "client-layer" inbetween.
Overall it looks pretty good now from my angle.

jep, he deserves this Nxt for his work