2025-12-24 17:27:20

Imagine you're planning a multi-chain perpetual derivatives DEX. The vision is grand, but reality is often less forgiving.

You're faced with two paths. One: spend an entire year writing contracts for each EVM-compatible chain, deploying Solana program modules, building cross-chain bridges, handling asset custody logic, ensuring security audits for every chain, and then praying that the system doesn't crash under real trading volume. This approach requires huge investment and carries significant risk.

The other: recognize that infrastructure is the key. Not everything needs to be built from scratch. Many multi-chain protocol stacks have already addressed core issues like compatibility, security, and cross-chain communication. By leveraging mature infrastructure solutions, you can focus your efforts on the core perpetual trading engine and risk control models.

This is not just a difference in coding effort, but also in project timeline, cost structure, and deployment risk. Choose the wrong path, and you might still be fixing issues a year later; choose the right one, and you could see real user trading within less than half a year.

View Original

This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.

24 Likes

Reward
24
10
Repost
Share

Comment

0/400

NotFinancialAdvice

· 2025-12-27 17:24

I'm here waiting to see who dares to spend a year building their own wheels.

View OriginalReply0

BackrowObserver

· 2025-12-26 17:11

Damn it, another entrepreneur story trying to reinvent the wheel from scratch.

View OriginalReply0

EternalMiner

· 2025-12-26 11:14

The king of卷, stop competing. Using ready-made infrastructure is the real winner.

View OriginalReply0

CryptoGoldmine

· 2025-12-24 20:48

This is the dilemma faced by current DEX builders. One year vs. half a year, the cost curve is directly widened. From an ROI perspective, the second approach clearly offers a better payback period. But frankly, very few teams truly understand infrastructure; most are still reinventing the wheel. The key is whether your computing network can be developed successfully. If the infrastructure is done right, subsequent risk control iterations will be much easier.

View OriginalReply0

just_another_fish

· 2025-12-24 17:56

Really, those who reinvent the wheel are all regretful.

View OriginalReply0

ProbablyNothing

· 2025-12-24 17:54

Building your own wheel for a year is not as good as using ready-made ones in half a year—that's the speed battle of Web3.

View OriginalReply0

SolidityJester

· 2025-12-24 17:52

It's another old debate of "reinventing the wheel" vs. "standing on the shoulders of giants"... but honestly, this time it really hit home. Don't wait a year to regret it; infrastructure is indeed a hurdle that can't be bypassed.

View OriginalReply0

CryptoCross-TalkClub

· 2025-12-24 17:51

Laughing out loud, this is the real-life version of "I want to build my own wheel" VS "Buy ready-made," many project teams die on the first path. Half a year vs one year, the difference is whether you can survive to see the next bull market.

View OriginalReply0

fren_with_benefits

· 2025-12-24 17:49

Another scene of the entrepreneurial dream of "building the wheel from scratch" falling apart Stop talking, choosing the infra path was the right decision all along A reliable infrastructure stack can indeed save a year; it's not laziness Thinking back to a previous project where I wrote a cross-chain bridge myself and it failed online Using ready-made solutions to get the core logic right is the real priority Half a year to go live vs. still debugging after a year, do you still need to do the math? Many people fail because they are unwilling to admit that they don't need to do everything themselves in reality

View OriginalReply0