Questions from Beginners MQL5 MT5 MetaTrader 5 - page 1319
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
I am self-taught and will not be able to explain it to you - I just chose the functions that I need, I know that this goes there and that goes there.
Basically all the functions I copy from the codes of Vladimir Karputov, for which I thank him very much! - He will tell you if you have any questions.
You are self-taught, and I just started programming, and my head is full of questions.
I have the algorithm for this EA in my head and it's no problem if I have to change the indicator in the process, because there are only two tasks (direction point - up and direction point - down).
Inheritance involves creating a class.
So I'm writing -- which class should I inherit my class from to use these methods from their standard library?
here's another option - once the take is triggered - will open again in the same direction
Exactly right, with profit !!!
At first glance - everything is correct.
And the fact that there should be no Stop Loss - all correct too.
But I do not understand what happens to the oder, which is not closed at Take Profit....... when the direction of price changes....(just closes by default, i.e. on the signal of the trend change indicator)? If so, that's not my intention.
And according to my idea - the order should remain, but here it should come into effect - a martin with its settings:
I.e. set orders in the opposite direction to the trend with increasing lot and averaging take profit. In short, work like a simple Martin, for example (Adviser Autoprofit 3), which is in the open source in the web, but written in mql4.
By the way, the original variant of trend work, which you correctly wrote, has not been cancelled when working with Martin.
In short, the trend work is one task, which you have brilliantly demonstrated in part, and the second task is a martin.
It is not necessary that these two tasks are interrelated - in my opinion, they can work completely independently
Absolutely right, with profits !!!
At first glance - everything is correct.
And the fact that the Stop Loss - should not be there either - all correct.
But I did not understand where the oder, which did not close at Take Profit....... when the direction of price changes....(it just closes by default, i.e. on the signal of the trend change indicator)? If so, that's not my intention.
But according to my idea, the order should remain, but a martin with its settings should come into effect here:
The same is true for the other side of the trend with increasing lot size and averaging the Take Profit. In short, work like a simple Martin - for example (Autoprofit 3), which is open source on the web, but written in mql4.One remark at once: not "order", but "position".
One remark at once: not "order", but "position".
all the options I could find - there don't seem to be any more
all the options I could find - there don't seem to be any more
I have already written above:
These two tasks don't have to be interrelated - in my opinion, they can work completely independently.
Such an algorithm that I propose (in my opinion) has not yet been used by programmers. In any case, I have not found such a solution - on the Internet.
this is probably not possible to implement
it does not give - on the symbol, there must be one position (if it is closed on a profit and reopened a position) (and when the opposite signal is applied - it cannot open in the other direction
if just from a signal (from a point) there is no problem . (and this should not be present in the code (line above)))
this is probably not possible to implement
it does not give - on the symbol, there must be one position (if it is closed on a profit and reopened a position) (and when the opposite signal is applied - it cannot open in the other direction
if just from a signal (from a point) there is no problem . (and then, it should not be present in the code (line above)))
After upgrading to version 2981, an error started appearing in the line