Discussion on MQL4 documentation - page 15

New comment
 
Renat:
Jurix, I can see that you are engaging solely in criticism.

Renate, an almost philosophical thought. I remember how Microsoft ended up being attacked by the EU and other organisations on the security of their (MS) software. Bill Gates wrote an open letter to all his employees urging them to give product security the highest attention and priority. The company itself performs full BugTracking in the development environment, analysis of bugs, search for similar code when they are found, semiannually conclusions on the work of each employee personally etc. And now we were assured at the "Microsoft Development Days" seminars a week ago that MS products have become, according to reputable third-party research, one of the safest in the world. Part of the Microsoft source code for entire products is open to corporate users under certain licenses.

With regards to MQL. If, thanks to MetaTrader4, so many lamas have entered the market, apart from the pros... beginners, your company may have to devote some resources to revise the documentation. As they say, we are responsible for what we have tamed. Apparently you are the market leader in trading systems, it's not easy, and there is a certain, almost social, responsibility attached. Just think about it.
 
Very curious, but it seems that in this particular branch of lamas... there are hardly any newcomers. Generally speaking, newcomers are the hardest to deal with: they usually cannot articulate their grievances clearly, as they do not know the real requirements for documentation. It is therefore not up to the drowning men to save the drowning men. Perhaps, this is the "social" part of Metaquotes Software Corp's responsibility - together with those in the forum who know the language.
 

Maybe we could really create at least a branch where newbies could ask questions not on specific tasks, but on mastering the language and writing principles. I just don't dare to ask general questions that I can't find answers in the documentation. In such a branch, you could feel free to get an answer. Are you, as developers, okay with such a branch?

 
Correct me, but I get the feeling that people don't see where they are.

What is MQL4.community, if not a huge multi-language online library of MQL4 and a lot of helpers? It all has one goal - to provide the possibility of learning to everyone.

Dmitrich, it's clear that you are asking the initial questions simply because you haven't read the website and you're unaware of the vast amount of information accumulated. Now do not pretend that you are still on an empty site. If there is a technical question, create a separate clearly stated topic on the specific issue.
 
Renat:
Jurix, I can see that you are engaging solely in criticism.

Renat, you may have forgotten, but it was you who urged me not to be unsubstantiated and to point out "obvious" or "factual" errors. Moreover, you promised to correct them if I, or anyone else, pointed them out.

Instead, you, crossing the line of correctness, start labeling them. That stance may be fine for a moderator who defends his firm's uniform, but it's hardly worthy of an executive.

Note that while opinions differ about the textbook, there is virtually unanimity about the quality of the documentation. No one has ever tried to call it good or consistent with generally accepted requirements.

This is what you maintain this forum for - to bring developers into contact with users. Especially skilled users. So should you be so harsh with them instead of thanking them?
 
In both cases I see no factual errors. But I do see the pure position of a critic who has very probably done nothing for the public himself.

Do not confuse our gratitude with your attempts to bring the matter to our self-defeating attention. Don't make a virtue of yourself.
 

Yurixx, I certainly supported you about ArrayRange () and suggested a specific help option, which Renat agreed with. Suggest a similar variant for OrderClose(). Not necessarily in English, you may do it in Russian. Some of your posts really look like unconstructive criticism, since you don't offer anything in return.

 
Mathemat:

Yurixx, I certainly supported you about ArrayRange() and suggested a specific help option, which Renat agreed with. Suggest a similar variant for OrderClose(). Not necessarily in English, you may do it in Russian too. Some of your posts really look like unconstructive criticism, since you don't offer anything in return.


I will not play this game. As well as deal with you where you see unconstructive.
It is ridiculous, right, to think that anyone here knows how things should be better than the developers.
It is also ridiculous to think that they need us to teach them.

If Renat thinks there's nothing wrong with the documentation, it's not for me to convince him otherwise.
If he knows that it is not, but simply does not want to admit aloud that his comments are fair, then the documentation will be worked on. And that is all we need. For the sake of that I am willing to overlook even outright rudeness. The moderator is welcome. :-))

Some time ago I saw a small mistake in MQ linear regression channel. Picked up this topic (not the first one) here https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/50620
Cited an erroneous line of code, wrote below how it should be. Very constructive, you would have been pleased. And - no reaction.

Two months later, the topic appeared here again https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/50881. This time, I don't know why, but it got a response. The error was corrected and everyone is happy. I have drawn some conclusions which I have been following ever since:
1. If you have any good suggestions on MT, post on the forum.
2. If you have, be patient. If you have to, they will be noticed.
3. If they are not accepted, don't do it. This firm has an owner, and it is not you.

 
Yurixx:

...
Two months later, the topic came up again here https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/50881 This time, I don't know why, there was a resonance after all. The error was corrected and everyone is happy. I have since drawn some conclusions which I have been following:
1. If you have any good suggestions on MT, post on the forum.
2. If you have, be patient. If you have to, they will be noticed.
3. If they are not accepted, don't do it. This firm has an owner, and it is not you.

Nothing passes without a trace, or water grinds stone. You, as a long-time forum user, I think, have roughly understood the mechanism of feedback on the forum. :)

The Forum (and MQL4 documentation) is being constantly improved, believe me. I would be grateful for changes in MQL4 function descriptions, such as the one Mathemat suggested for the ArrayRange() function.
 
Rosh:
Yurixx:

...
Two months later the topic appeared here again https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/50881. This time I don't know why, but still there was resonance. The error was corrected and everybody is satisfied. I have drawn some conclusions which I have been following ever since:
1. If you have any good suggestions on MT, post on the forum.
2. If you have, be patient. If you have to, they will be noticed.
3. If they are not accepted, don't do it. This firm has an owner and it's not you.

Nothing passes without a trace, or water grinds stone. As a long-time forum user, I think you've roughly grasped the feedback mechanism on the forum. :)

The Forum (and MQL4 documentation) is being constantly improved, believe me. I would be grateful for changes in MQL4 function descriptions, such as the one Mathemat suggested for ArrayRange().


I not only believe it, but also see it with my own eyes. This is why I'm participating in the forum.

And I would appreciate a clear statement of when normalisation double is needed. Is it necessary in case of the following expression, for example:

double prc = Ask + 25*Point;

1...891011121314151617181920
New comment