HOW to get a programmer 100% interested in writing an EA based on your IDEA - page 9

New comment
 
bstone:
Funny, funny. Almost from the first posts the thread abruptly moved from " HOW 100% to get the programmer interested in writing an advisor for your IDEA" to "I'm a cool coder and 99% of customers are suckers".

I support Igor:

- but here's the bad word 'sucker' let's replace it with BAD... both for CUSTOMER and PROGRAMMER

but there's a thought in the thread where 'bad' looks like a programmer, try to go further

---

going back to the source, maybe strengthen P2 or add P3

your terms of reference are awesome but i'm not a good programmer to understand your TOR, or i'm not able to program it

 
Gostovian design stages :
Survey = exploration (geological of course))), research, proof-evaluation of the profitability of the chosen one.
survey = task description
staging = Design in units and large blocks. Providing a prototype. Mock-up.
development = Technical design, i.e. design in detail from the original prototype or mock-up.
Implementation = commissioning, testing, adjustment, training.
So at what stage does the customer usually order the MTS/EA? - Usually with a description of the task/problem and that's it.)))
Yes, also the customer's research is highly questionable from his limited capabilities...
Who then does the staging, development from the staging, testing, tuning, training???
That is why ( for example) I am a programmer, not a programmer.
 
Korey: That's why ( for example) I am a programmer, not a programmer.
More precisely: a developer :-), as the task does not exclude knowledge of system programming, knowledge of hardware and interaction interfaces.
 

Yeah, I'm going to get out of it, open my own institute, and have electronics in it.

 
YuraZ:
1 - give access to your real account on which your idea is worked out
( it is clear that there should be not 1 -2 deals, but a decent period)
is of course allowed a demo...
2 - Write a clear ToR
these two points are MORE than enough!
Yura, now I'll get you interested without these two points.

I have a great idea! I haven't tried it and won't check it until I write the predictor.
1. The same principle is used as in NS.
2. You already used this principle yourself about two years ago.
3. There is a data source.
4. You have to write an indicator.
5. Then, if you want, you can write an advisor on it. It'll be better than your beloved Batter's. It won't make losing trades.

You know my approach. A TS that makes at least one losing trade is a bad TS.
Except there's a big flaw in all of this. There's no good communication with you.
 
Zhunko:
YuraZ:
1 - give access to your real account where your idea is worked out
( it is clear that there should be not 1 or 2 trades but a decent period)
A demo is possible, of course ...
2 - Write a clear TOR
These two points are MORE than enough!
Yura, now I will get you interested without these two points.

There's a great idea! I haven't tried it and won't check it until I write the predictor.
1. The same principle is used as in the NS.
2. You already used this principle yourself about two years ago.
3. There is a source of data.
4. I need to write an indicator.
5. Then, if you want, you can write an advisor on it. It will be better than your beloved Batter's. It won't make losing trades.

You know my approach. A TS that makes at least one losing trade is a bad TS.
Except there's a big flaw in all of this. There's no good communication with you.
Who's got more experience? Programmers or ideas?
 
Zhunko:
Yura, now I'm going to get you interested without those two points.

I have a great idea! I haven't tried it and won't test it until I write a predictor.
1. The same principle is used as in the NS.
2. You already used this principle yourself about two years ago.
3. There is a source of data.
4. I need to write an indicator.
5. Then, if you want, you can write an advisor on it. It'll be better than your beloved Batter's. It won't make losing trades.

You know my approach. A TS that makes at least one losing trade is a bad TS.
Except there's a big flaw in all of this. There's no good communication with you.
Vadim, with such an attitude any programmer may be interested in an idea! :-)
 
Korey:

Yeah, I'm going to get out of it, open my own institute, and have electronics in it.

Thoughts and money (wants and possibilities).
Heh...:) "And we also walk dogs" (trading).
 
SK. писал (а):
Korey:

Yeah, I'll get my own institute, I'll open an institute with electronics in it.

Thoughts and money (wants and possibilities).
Hee...:) "We also walk the dogs" (trading).
Also a KE progressor)))
 

Dear programmers!

Please show me what should be done so that instead of buying an EA makes sales, and instead of STOPLOSS puts TAKE PROFIT

if (iVolume(NULL,0,0)==1){
    Print("WATR1="+iCustom( NULL, 0, "WATR", 0, 0) );
    Print("WATR2="+iCustom( NULL, 0, "WATR", 1, 0) );
    
    if (iCustom( NULL, 0, "WATR", 0, 2)<1000 && iCustom( NULL, 0, "WATR", 1, 1)<1000) {tiket =OrderSend(Symbol(),OP_SELL,lot,Bid,3,iCustom( NULL, 0, "WATR", 1, 0),0,NULL,16384,0,Red);}
    if (iCustom( NULL, 0, "WATR", 1, 2)<1000 && iCustom( NULL, 0, "WATR", 0, 1)<1000) {tiket= OrderSend(Symbol(),OP_BUY,lot,Ask,3, iCustom( NULL, 0, "WATR", 0, 0),0,NULL,16384,0,Green);}
    CheckOrders();
   
//----
   return(0);
  }
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
 
}
void CheckOrders(){
int pos=0;
int total=OrdersTotal();
for (pos=0;pos<total;pos++) {
if (OrderSelect(pos,SELECT_BY_POS,MODE_TRADES)==true){ 
if (OrderType()==OP_BUY && OrderStopLoss()<iCustom( NULL, 0, "WATR", 0, 1))OrderModify(OrderTicket(),OrderOpenPrice(),iCustom( NULL, 0, "WATR", 0, 1),OrderTakeProfit(),0,Green);
if (OrderType()==OP_SELL && OrderStopLoss()>iCustom( NULL, 0, "WATR", 1, 1))OrderModify(OrderTicket(),OrderOpenPrice(),iCustom( NULL, 0, "WATR", 1, 1),OrderTakeProfit(),0,Red);
                                                                                   }
                                                          }
                                      }
12345678910111213
New comment