MetaEditor build 1463 - page 12

New comment
 
As the current build of the editor is now 1464, please do not post here if you have 1463.
 
Vladimir Karputov:

Do you have this in build 1463?

And you should always be prepared for a return of zero in the market.

1463. It's not about protection (it's everywhere), it's about logic. CopyTicks returns bid/ask == 0 - ok. SymbolInfoDouble usually did not return zero in the tester. Is it an error or not?
 
fxsaber:
1463. It's not about protection (it's everywhere), it's about logic. CopyTicks returns bid/ask == 0 - normal. SymbolInfoDouble usually did not return zero in the tester. Is it error or not?
It seems to be before, especially for real ticks at the start - at first two-three ticks it imitates the real data loading. That's why I introduced protection. Thanks to the protection I stopped just to see appearance of zero in .Bid() and .Ask() - so I haven't seen it for a long time - the program just bypassed a code section automatically.
 
coderex:
Renat Fatkhullin, are there plans to introduce void and pointers for fundamental types?
Renat Fatkhullin:

None of the dangerous references will be unambiguous.

Dangerous ones are not needed. Everything can be easily implemented through auxiliary objects-containers or objects redirecting access. And the necessity of their creation is determined at the compilation stage, if there is a pointer taking operation.

I discussed this topic with the service-desk. They said they haven't found a way that would be both safe and fast at the same time. But they are mutually exclusive. If everything is based on reliability, then of course no one expects much speed. And it is not required. Better a slow version than none at all, isn't it?

 
Vladimir Karputov:

Since MetaEditor's open tabs now show the presence of file changes compared to the Warehouse, could the right menu for working with the Warehouse be "screwed" to the right click on the file tab? Something like that:

The request is removed, because (maybe it was in 1463 as well, but only noticed in 1464) if a file is put into the Warehouse and code editing is done in that file, you can fix the change in the Warehouse simply by right-clicking NOT ON the FILE tab, but in ANY place in the code of that changed file.
 
Renat Fatkhullin:

Yes, now the idea is clear.

It's been requested for a long time and we will make an additional master report, which drains not only orders with trades, but also cleared trades (that's where the horror is).

We just need to get our act together.

A good history solution has emerged. When the order/trade line in the terminal's history table is selected, it should highlight all of the lines that match the POSITON_ID. It will make history reading 1000 times easier. And add the POSITION_ID column. Such a solution doesn't require "getting it together". And the MT4 representation - when you get it together.
 
Navigated to the function description via ALT+G. How do I jump back to where I pressed ALT+G?
 
Make
bool  HistorySelect(
   datetime  from_date = 0,     // с даты
   datetime  to_date = 0        // по дату
   );

from_date == 0 - take history from the beginning.

to_date = 0 - take ALL history from from_date.

Then it will be very convenient to call

HistorySelect(); // вся история
HistorySelect(From) // вся история с даты From
And it will be guaranteed that it will take the entire history and not just a part of it (to_date == TimeCurrent() cases).
 
fxsaber:
Navigated to the function description via ALT+G. How do I jump back to where I pressed ALT+G?
Try pressing "ctrl "+"-". But it doesn't always work.
 
Alexey Kozitsyn:
Try pressing "ctrl "+"-". But it doesn't always work.
Cool, thanks!
1...5678910111213141516
New comment