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
The SD's application includes a link to my posts in this thread. I have described the problem in detail here. I even gave some methods for solving it.
Missed it, apparently. The link?
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/42122/page25#comment_2928153
and beyond.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/42122/page25#comment_2928153
et seq.
I read it. So it's not a problem of CopyTicks!
What's the problem?
If you can't process everything to one tick, isn't that a CopyTicks() problem?
What's the problem?
The formation of volume fields of bars.
Honestly, I don't even know if I need to analyse bars when there is a tick history.
I can't imagine that my TS will analyze bar-history in the future. I do not need it when there is tick history!
The formation of volume fields of bars.
No, not all of them... the errors are floating... ...they are there and then they are not. It's hardly because of volumes that the indicator sends to the volume[] array.
The formation of volume fields of bars.
Honestly, I don't even know if I need to analyse bars when there is tick history.
I can't imagine that my TS will analyze bar-history in the future. I don't need it when I have tick history!
The same story was compared with another source - no discrepancies were found.
I found at least 3 variations of divergence. Also variations on history. And what I compared (CopyRealVolume()).- is also likely to work incorrectly.
That's why you don't even want to look at the bars.
I ran this indicator
Everywhere I looked, Volume == TurnOver_BUY - TurnOver_SELL. Didn't do an automatic check, of course.