I looked at almost all the summary and analysis reports that introduced the low**, and almost none of the low-level product logic was clearly explained. Today I try not to use complex technical terms, nor to use **, to explain this matter to everyone, what is going on with low **! (I'll omit all of them, and we'll go straight to the bottom of the logic, and this way of analyzing products and technologies should be universal.) ）
Who is the low ** for?
There are three types of people: 1. Developers Programmer: (or more generally) The logic of the core development of an application or program is no different from writing. (Procedural logic is procedural logic, there is no second kind of logic).
Logical Requirements: Strong.
Development methods: mouse click, connection, drag-and-drop, configuration.
The relationship between low ** and "**" is best "**can be used, and can be made without **").
2. Business editors: those who design various workflows, forms, and charts only need to know the business logic and how to operate, and do not need "program logic", but have a deep understanding of the business itself.
Logical Requirement Competency: Medium.
Development methods: mouse click, connection, drag-and-drop, configuration.
3. Business users: (i.e., the final users of the business) such as filling in forms, making approval evaluations, and filling in records. In short, it is the user who finally uses the interface and related functions configured by the "business configurator".
Logical Requirements: Low.
Development methods: mouse click, connection, drag-and-drop, configuration.
Three states. 
1. Development state: (different from the "runtime" state) How to understand the development state? I'll give you two examples, for example, the operating system windows, when developing windows** to design the entire system, it is the development state, thousands of engineers are writing and debugging, and then compiled into windows system software, and finally after you buy the computer, boot up, enter the windows system desktop, this time is the runtime. An exception is that the DNA in your body can be understood as a developing state, and your brain can be understood as a runtime. The development state means that anything can be modified, and the flexibility is high; At runtime, some parts are already solidified and are not easy to modify.
2. Runtime-Business Editing State: This state corresponds to the above "Business Editor", that is, the process in which "Business Editor" uses "Editor or Designer".
3. Runtime - business operation state: This state corresponds to the above "business users", which I will not repeat, almost all low-level platforms use this part consistently, as can be seen from the above figure.
Core differences between low** platforms.
With the previous "three types of people" and "three states (in fact, low-** products can only be produced in the first two states)", it is enough to put all the existing low-** platforms inside. (View the attached drawing directly).
And you'll find something interesting:
In the "development state" to make products, one of the core embodiments is that the "generation" method is usually more difficult, usually requires "intermediate language DDL editor interpreter", etc., needs "graphical logical expression", and the R&D cycle is often relatively long (no good things can be made in a short period of time).
Putting "developers" and "business editors" under one product (the traditional practice of mendix outsystems codew**e, etc.), whether in "development state" or "runtime-business editing state", is a rather awkward thing, on the one hand, it is necessary to design multiple designers for different people to use (which is also the reason for the existence of multiple designs), and on the other hand, to put "two waves of completely different people" under one product, usually both sides are not pleasing to both sides. "Developers find it inconvenient and troublesome to operate", "Business editors feel that they can't understand it, and there is too much relevant background knowledge". (As you can see from the image above, there are some products that directly remove the "developer", which is similar to SaaS.) ）
IVX does not design multiple sets of "editors", but rather an "IDE", which is more like a "graphical programming language", and does not need to put "developers" and "business editors" under one product.
Some large platforms have directly made "low**" into a rapid adhesive or "rapid development tool designer" for their own ecology, such as Yida, Powerplatform, etc., which is also an idea, but the platform must be large enough.
In addition, I would say that whether a tool is good or not, technology accounts for at most half, and the other half is the product! And in the end, whether it brings efficiency to users and whether it is cool to use may be the key to success.