Arrays....

New comment
 

Hi guys...

My EA has about 30 Arrays - all calculating specific values - which are stored in Global Variables that I use throughout my code.

My Question is:

- Will my code be faster if I consolidate all (or group) my Arrays and Global Variables in 1 function?

 
They could actually be stored in 1 or 2 Arrays... I'm just wondering if it will be faster (processor wise) to do it that way or if storing values in Global variables makes no difference...
 
  1. Do you mean globally declared variables or Global Variables of the Terminal which is used for inter-process communications?
  2. Why do you care about a couple of milliseconds?
 

Hi Roeder.... Globally declared variables....

I'm trying to get my EA to run optimally... at the moment it is using 25% - 40% of my cpu... I'm just wondering if I should group all of my Arrays into one big Array and then allocate Global Variable values - as opposed to 30 or 40 Arrays calculating the same values that individually make up the same data...

Sorry, this is difficult to explain....

I guess what I am asking is this:

If I call the value of a Global Variable (Globally declared variable)... does that make the Array re-calculate... because if it does then I would rather have a longer "Wait" period so that the "Bigger Array" could do it's the calculations... as opposed to re-calculating all the individual ones...

I'm just wondering... because I always thought that a Global Variable (Globally declared variable) gets it's value - and keeps it - until the code comes past it and recalculates the value...

... but it seems that the more calculations I put on that "Global Variable" the higher my cpu requirement is... so... I'm just thinking... maybe when I call a variable it actually recalculates that variables value (ie. runs the Array that produces the value)... 

I know it should not work that way... but that is what is happening...

My cpu processing goes up the more I use the Global Variables... when logically it should'nt because they are assigned a value (until the next sweep that is)... 

...if that makes any sense

 

Sorry... I care.. because I am just about to go into the "Optimizing" stage of the game.. so I need to run as many instances of MT4 as possible...

The higher the cpu requirement... the less/fewer instances I can run

 
Hmm, answers about this would be speculative or philosophical... why don't you post your code?
 
lippmaje:
Hmm, answers about this would be speculative or philosophical... why don't you post your code?

I would prefer "Actual"... but anyways... let me put it this way:

Is it better (faster) to structure - getting -the values of my Global Variables like this:


Array_1[15,1];

Array_1[i,0] = iCustom(Symbol(),0,Etc1.,0,i);

Value_1 = Array_1[i,0];


Array_2[15,1];

Array_2[i,0] = iCustom(Symbol(),0,Etc2.,0,i);

Value_2 = Array_1[i,0];


Array_3[15,1];

Array_3[i,0] = iCustom(Symbol(),0,Etc3.,0,i);

Value_3 = Array_1[i,0];

.

.

.dito 30 arrays


Or...:


Array_All[15,30]

Array_All[i,0] = iCustom(Symbol(),0,Etc1.,0,i);

Array_All[i,1] = iCustom(Symbol(),0,Etc2.,0,i);

Array_All[i,2] = iCustom(Symbol(),0,Etc3.,0,i);

.... etc. etc...

...then

Value_1 = Array_All[0,0];

Value_2 = Array_All[0,1];

Value_3 = Array_All[0,2];


Which structure uses the least cpu resource?

If that makes any sense...

 

Sorry.. this is quite vital...

Value_X = (Value_1 + Value_2 + Value_3);


I could calculate Value_X as above... OR...

I could calculate it in the Array: ie:

Array_All[i,3] =  (Array_All[i,0] + Array_All[i,1]  + Array_All[i,2] );

Value_X = Array_All[0,3];


So, in theory, it should be more efficient to run a bigger Array.... as opposed to lots of smaller ones...

Which way is better... or more efficient?

 
Sorry Lippmaje... the code would bore everyone... it's too long to paste as an example here...
 
I guess the only way to find out for sure is to re-structure the code... will do that and post an update for anyone interested...
 
Most of the cycles will be used by iCustom. Try to minimze the calls to it.
12
New comment