Positions closed seconds after they are opened in Build 600. Please help. - page 2

New comment
 
ubzen:
Not long. If anything gets abandoned, it'll probably be that first.

So yeah I get it. Newest language/platform mql4+ ... oldest html_facilities for the next 5-years.
In my opinion . . . it's not a new language, it's just a cut and shut, mql4 bonnet + mql5 boot . . . hurry up and get moved onto MT5 so MT4 can be killed off . . . once you have fixed your code to make it work with mql4.5 it will be easy to move it to mql5.
 
RaptorUK: In my opinion . . . it's not a new language, it's just a cut and shut, mql4 bonnet + mql5 boot . . . hurry up and get moved onto MT5 so MT4 can be killed off . . . once you have fixed your code to make it work with mql4.5 it will be easy to move it to mql5.
Yeah you're right its crap. I taught all I would have to fix is dots and underscores ... boy was I wrong. This slick way of making people code in mql5_procedural is quite corney. Why go through all this trouble of baby-steps to mql5?
 
ubzen:
Yeah you're right its crap. I taught all I would have to fix is dots and underscores ... boy was I wrong. This slick way of making people code in mql5_procedural is quite corney. Why go through all this trouble of baby-steps to mql5?
In my opinion . . . the promise of backwards compatibility is there to keep people on board . . . then they find that a few things don't work so they fix them or get them fixed, then gradually they open their eyes to the bounty of mql5 . . then BANG ! ! old mql4 code no longer works, what then ? switch to mql5

Anyway . . . we are getting off topic, best not to do that anymore.
 
RaptorUK:
I do not know . . . but I suspect not. How long do you think "old" mql4 code is going to be supported ?

Renat worte on Russian forum it can be a year, dependently of the situation.
 
RaptorUK:
In my opinion . . . the promise of backwards compatibility is there to keep people on board . . . then they find that a few things don't work so they fix them or get them fixed, then gradually they open their eyes to the bounty of mql5 . . then BANG ! ! old mql4 code no longer works, what then ? switch to mql5

Anyway . . . we are getting off topic, best not to do that anymore.

This post and previous are all only assumptions. You can be right, maybe, but I don't think so, anyway, can you please remain on the topic now. Thank you.
 
ubzen:
Yeah you're right its crap. I taught all I would have to fix is dots and underscores ... boy was I wrong. This slick way of making people code in mql5_procedural is quite corney. Why go through all this trouble of baby-steps to mql5?

Can you be more explicit about "dot and underscores" to fix, the changes are well documented, long time before the release. Of course there are a lot of bugs on this new MT4, though I am not sure it's preventable.

By the way, users who have this problem 'position closed seconds..." have to post more information. It's not very clear until now.

 
angevoyageur: ...

Can you be more explicit about "dot and underscores" to fix, the changes are well documented, long time before the release. Agree. I was making fun of my perceived simplicity to convert <-- this perception was a long time ago. Anyone who needs the list of reserve_characters can find that post. And if I remember correctly _underscore isn't one of them. I'm talking about behavior of functions changing. I don't mind coding in mql5_procedural its basically an expended version of mql4. I always code with one_hand while holding the documentations in the other_hand. Therefore stuff like parameter changes do-not bother me. What does make life difficult are the changes in behaviors ... this part isn't well documented ... and I fear that it might never be.

Of course there are a lot of bugs on this new MT4, though I am not sure it's preventable ... they should have waited a year. less bugs. I mean, no software is bug-free even old mt4 was considered buggy by allot of know-it-all programmers.

By the way, users who have this problem 'position closed seconds..." have to post more information. It's not very clear until now. Agree.

 
ubzen:

Can you be more explicit about "dot and underscores" to fix, the changes are well documented, long time before the release. Agree. I was making fun of my perceived simplicity to convert <-- this perception was a long time ago. Anyone who needs the list of reserve_characters can find that post. And if I remember correctly _underscore isn't one of them. I'm talking about behavior of functions changing. I don't mind coding in mql5_procedural its basically an expended version of mql4. I always code with one_hand while holding the documentations in the other_hand. Therefore stuff like parameter changes do-not bother me. What does make life difficult are the changes in behaviors ... this part isn't well documented ... and I fear that it might never be.

Understood. My suggestion would be to create a topic (or topics) about that, if most forum regulars work that could be done fairly easily. What do you think ?

Of course there are a lot of bugs on this new MT4, though I am not sure it's preventable ... they should have waited a year. less bugs. I mean, no software is bug-free even old mt4 was considered buggy by allot of know-it-all programmers.

Maybe, maybe not. Anyway we have to deal with the situation, and as you know I don't like complaining (I know you never complain ;-).


By the way, users who have this problem 'position closed seconds..." have to post more information. It's not very clear until now. Agree.

See this topic.
 
angevoyageur:

Understood. My suggestion would be to create a topic (or topics) about that, if most forum regulars work that could be done fairly easily. What do you think ?

Maybe, maybe not. Anyway we have to deal with the situation, and as you know I don't like complaining (I know you never complain ;-).


See this topic.

Ok ... I'll start a topic.
12
New comment