MQL: security vs opportunities - page 6
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
We just made the pips so you don't have to use files.
I understand perfectly why server pips in the terminal. Only and only (everything else is just excuses) for one task - to combine terminals for the sake of arbitrage. But that's not one of our tasks.
Who really wants to make an inter-processor exchange, may simply implement a multichannel pipe-server. But you can't sell that in a marketplace, which is what you're after.
Renat, allow me to raise a "red-letter" subject:
What, as a matter of fact, is wrong with arbitrage? Or even (Oh my God!) with cheating?
Is it immoral? Is it illegal? Is it dangerously wrong?
There is a strong impression that you (MetaQuotes and you personally) systematically impose some "correct" (approved by MetaQuotes?) trading model on traders (trade on large timeframes, on one chart (broker), on one terminal, etc., etc.......
And most of listed ideas (restrictions) are suggested as almost "moral standards of an honest trader". By the way, (by the way) I, for example, associate the absence of tick quotes or user-loadable quotes with restrictions of above-mentioned kind (and not with technical problems).
Am I wrong? If I am, then why?
For what (who) is arbitrage harmful (dangerous, undesirable)? Or the same cheating?
For a trader? Not really.
Who is the victim? The market? The terminal, the trading server? Or (especially) an unscrupulous (or just - slow) broker (dealer)?
Why is it necessary (from your side) to prevent simultaneous STATE access to different feeds?
Please answer without reference to "long-established" and "all honest people understand" topics, because an unpleasant residue is often left from such discussions. As if you are avoiding an honest discussion of some (close to those listed) topics.
Maybe I'm imagining things, maybe an open discussion of the above would "straighten out" for me and those who see such bias from your side.
Do you mind clarifying such issues?
I already replied directly in the same post: ...To merge terminals for the sake of arbitrage. But that is not part of our task.
Whoever wants to, can easily do whatever they want. We have given all the means to do so. But no more than that.
I already replied directly in the same post: ...To merge terminals for the sake of arbitrage. But that is not part of our task.
Whoever wants to, can easily do whatever they want. We have given all the means to do so. But no more than that.
I read this post. Very carefully, and without missing anything. Thereseemed to be nothing to object to, .
I just wanted to discuss exactly how much it contradicts your objectives.
Do I see a contradiction where there is none?
And everyone here is talking about holes in the screws - is it serious?
I have 2 servers of my own working uninterruptedly for 5 years, each with 2-5-10-15 (depending on the situation) terminals and active information exchange via files.
So, are there holes in the screws? Can you see them in the light =) or is there some software to check them?How bad is it?
Or am I lucky and they didn't screw up purely by accident?
PS: I'm FOR the possibility of two-way exchange, but I agree with Renat that connecting a DLL (with explicit permission) is enough for that. There's no place for spies in the marketplace.
You think you can't do spyware on files, but you can do it on virtual files?
PS I can send you 4 vinyls that have been dead for 1.5 years (all brands from samsugn to wd).
PPS all have the same problem, after warming up they stop reading the fat area. It can't be just a coincidence. The problems started when I started to actively use file sharing software.
PPPS last drive fell in december green WD 500gb (didn't last half a year). Now I'm using Fujitsu laptop.
Well, what the hell with the screws, let's consider it an income tax, $100 per quarter (although it's a bit of a toss-up for me personally).
But agree, data exchange through a viral file will be many times faster.
Also, as I wrote above, you can save a bitmap made on the fly in OpenCL, which is a fundamentally different approach.
This opens up new possibilities.
Urain:
The same bitmap can be saved into it, but it is a qualitatively different approach.
The solution within one Expert Advisor is CFastFile (in the MQH\Ctrl folder, have a look).
but as the test has shown, outputting a bitmap onto a chart is a waste of time compared to objects. CView rules :)
...
So, are there holes in the screws? Can you see them in the light =) or is there some kind of software to check them?What's wrong with that?
2. Or am I lucky and they didn't screw up purely by accident?
Checking
Restore
2. With a high probability, yes.
Check
Restore
2. There's a good chance it is.
This is all nonsense. It's not like you're running gigabytes around the clock.
The operating system and system processes are orders of magnitude more disk-intensive.