IMax Indicator - page 14

New comment
 

The current code in the version 3 detector is identical for both the indicator and the detector... how is it that you just now noticed some sync problem when you coded a dashboard... and never said a word... didn't you see the problem then? Why now... and the world can see that the code has not really changed... and I don't see any performance changes... except where it was suggested when the indicator was separate from the detector that there was minor phase problem at the turn of the phase... and I admit that, but could not document it, because it happens so fast. However, to an EA, a missed signal crossing carries potentially damaging consequences... but for manual trading... a flicker??? Not a big deal.. but I even went to the trouble to eliminate all problems, and as best as I can tell, they are resolved, and I discussed all relavant issues...

So, you just now noticed a problem even you have never seen before now? And, how can that be, when the code did not change functionally, and photos support the integrity of the coding so far... except yours and equaforex... but you have been using this all along... and never noticed anything till now?

 

Thank you sir!

But, as you can see... I have not seen the problem being discussed with the detector... until I do... there is not much I can do... my experience tells me don't alter code unless there is good reason to do it. I will be the first to make a change as soon as I see a problem... but, you know I am already alerted to a complaint, and I have been diligently looking at it... and continue to do so... but so far, you can see what I see too because I have shown it to you and equaforex... and I am not going to keep showing the same information over and over... and apparently you have no explaination either... But, if you do, make sure and post the exact problem and solution if you really want to help out... that is more useful than jumping on a band wagon to discredit someone's hard work... don't you think?

I still have not seen the problem and have been watching the charts continuously during this whole discussion... even now. And, I am using the version 3 detector in live trading... have all this time... so if you can't use it... I can, and do for now.

 

I thought I might have seen something... turned out I was looking at the MN1 arrow and not the M1.... so that is a relief...

I would point out that the version 3 detector has a global variable interface so it is possible to record every arrow change... and if anyone wants to do that, I would appreciate some input of that kind... just for an different kind of data, to support or refute any possible performance defects. Yes, I can do that myself, and will in time. So I have built in every conceivable means of utility in this version of this detector... I am not aware of any indicators that have a global variable interface especially for free, as this indicator does, at this site... or any any others for that matter... I thought that would make it especially useful rather than something easily passed up.

As the author of this code, I have seen no credible problems so far, and know that fundamentally this was well crafted code... Is it perfect??? Time will tell, and until there is more data collected on the subject... for now I am very confident in the version 3 detector working great... as is. But, if there is ever a well documented fault, I can work such data, and work up a solution, and will if necessary.

But, I do think that recording and observing the arrow changes using the global variable interface is a good challenge for anyone to work at... I know I will be working on that angle of development, which to me has the greatest potential for profit of all.

 

I am glad that you posted your code change for all to see... because any coder can see what you have done, and knows what I am saying is true...

You are taking a single signal, phase shifted it by one bar... hard coded that into my code... that you are trying to use...

This subtracts the advantage I tried to give you and any other users by amplitude shifting the signal and not relying upon a frequency shift... limited by the bar phases...

What you are doing is exactly what the original iMAX does... and coders can see that too.

Why don't you and equaforex leave this matter... I will, and will not alter my code, and see how it performs for others... you have made your points, and I think I have too. Time and more diversified input will probably help here, rather than more confusion introduced by you and equaforex who clearly do not understand the difference in signal processing used between iMAX and iMAXhp. You might be insulted here... but I cannot help that... you both wanted to publically post rather than PM me... so we have had our discussion public, and I getting tired of what I am considering a form of harrassment... when I have submitted supportive evidence for work I have done... and you and your friend keep showing things contradictory... that make no sense to me as the coder for this indicator, and are in my professional opinion amaturish attempts to hack away at some cosmetic solution for the box you are creating for yourself here in trying to discredit a well crafted indicator...

Someone else posted a public announcement that they found a bug in my code... in this thread... and they were clearly wrong.... so far, I have found my own mistakes usually within minutes of posting... because I always try to double check myself... I am not perfect... but I don't like being harrassed either!

 

If that works for you great...

You have changed reading buffer 1 to buffer 0, and now are reading a single buffer out of phase with itself, delayed by one bar....

I looked at this, and mine still works for me... no delay introduced, reading directly from the indicator buffers associated with the red and blue lines as rendered by the phase lines on the chart. Your code change reads one line, and delays that from itself... not as intended by me... but do what you think is best.

I would still not make that change to the code as published by me... and I do not recommend anyone making the change to the code as you suggest... but they can do what they want too. Hacking away to make cosmetic changes to code is not the same as truly understanding the mechanics of what one is doing... consider the mechanics of the code change you are publishing carefully...

I am still looking at all possible issues to perfect the indicator for general use, and I have seen the printed alert in the journal not matching the phase lines and arrows... so that might need some work. But, still my phase lines and detector arrows and global variables all seem to work as I predicted.

But, so far I am unable to replicate the different problems you and equaforex reported to me... and they are different... he showed me a signal out of phase 180 degrees with itself... I could not miss that after quickly double checking that... and that is not an issue... and now when I recheck his posts... his signals are in phase.... oh well... I know there is no gross phase shift problem, and you are showing me something where briefly at a switch in phases you claim the detector arrow and phase lines do not match... and I still have not replicated such a problem to begin with... and the code change you introduce... does cause a phase shift, and an unintended delay that degrades performance of the V3 Detector.

Actually what you have done is turn iMAXhp back into iMAX.... iMAX delayed the MOEF baseline signal by one bar... so if like your code change... just switch back to the original iMAX indicator... that has the same effect, and works more efficiently.

 

Alert and journal entries for alerts mismatching...

This is a valid issue... a mismatch of alert journal entries, and alerts issued by the v3 detector and this is true for iMAXalert in any form...

This is the paradox of not creating too many alerts, which by definition means we are not going to send an alert for every event that could cause an alert.

So, an alert is generated at the first alert event on the open bar, which is generally the most significant. Thereafter, alerts are filtered by time... and what is written in the journal is the first alert event... thereafter for the time that alerts are filtered there will be no more entries in the journal despite the fact that some events may have occured afterwards, until the alert filter time has elapsed.

From my experience, so far, the alerts are more than likely generated when useful, but not too many to harass the trader. But, this means that there will be gaps in the journal entries for every event that could have triggered an alert, but didn't. So when you try to match phase crossings and arrows to the alert journal entries they will match in time for those alerts logged, but there will be missing entries too, caused by the gaps in time where alerts are filtered.

I have no solution for this... if anyone does... that could help improve the performance of this indicator... but I don't think there is a solution... I believe a compromise has to be made, and currently the best possible compromise is in place... so I don't think I will be revising any code for this reason, and will let this issue rest where it is at. The indicator alerts are generated as best as possible under the circumstances.

 

I know the administrator of this site could verify that I have not uploaded any revisions to code submitted by me... during our discussion... and since, so, where do you get this information from??? Or, do just make things up as you go along??? Being visually impaired... I do often correct minor typos... in my comments... for a few minutes after I post... or sometimes when I catch a mispelling later or something.... but no code has been revised, so don't take that out... I knew you were trying to do that earlier when you wanted me to upload new code, and I didn't do it then, and haven't since... and don't intend to. Who do you think you are??? I submit what I deem useful, and not on your queue sir, ever! You publically were stating technical issues with the code, and I believe you were, and are, very incorrect, and I have left my code unaltered just like I did after someone else publicly said I had a bug in the code for the original iMAX and to this day that code remains unchanged, and that person never corrected their public statement... and now you are taking a similar tack of making public mistatements, and not correcting yourself.

This is why from now on, I will submit .exe versions here in the future... so others can thank you for that...

And there is a new revision coming probably next week sometime... and it should set a new standard...

iMAX and iMAXhp will be combined.... amplitudes for phase shifting iMAXhp will be done automatically.... in a multiple time frames and multiple currency display... 23 pairs... as many my broker supports (FXDD), with all, or as many as the user wishes viewable on a single chart. Most of the work is done already... but I am going to be working on allowing the user to select the currencies they wish to display, and hopefully even allowing them to order them... so I want to craft an extremenly useful trading tool, and this should be it... what is coming... and, you won't be able to use it as template... unless you are a decompiler!!! And, if was't for this recent harassment, I would have submittedd everything like I had been all along, in print or .mlq files... but, no more. And, if I really get upset... I won't contribute anything at all anymore... so hopefully this BS stops...

 

This is an outrageous lie... there is no... revised code submitted by me... so if yours is different.... how so??? And I do have a copyright... why are you playing with my published code for me??? Seems to me... you are way out of line. And I would like you to take down the code of mine you just posted... The unaltered code as copyright and published by me, is what I recommed users to use... Why should they listen to you, instead of the original author???

 

You saw what I just did... I edited a post.... and somewhere in your mind, you must have thought that I must have uploaded code, because you saw where I had edited a post.... you see how wrong you are, again????

Being visually challenged is one thing... I am... I don't even have a driver's license... can't see that well, and I admit to that challenge... but, I am not ethically challenged as you appear to be.

 
avi1:
I have the same version and build. The indicator is still not working. Do you have any ideas?

removed by request of wiley

1...7891011121314151617181920
New comment