Anti-MQL5 wishes - page 2

New comment
 
Korey:

to bstone

1. Have a look in the neighbouring thread 'Some more graphics',
The forum has accumulated a stratigraphy of layers of descriptions of similar ejes.

This has very little to do with questions about language improvement and, frankly, I don't see how the presence or absence of classes affects such nuances.

2. From your vast experience with various software and lack of fear of classes, it follows that,
You haven't got acquainted, for example, with addressing and passing parameters in MQL-4, and this, you must admit, is kindergarten.
How did you come to that conclusion regarding my knowledge? Please share.

What don't you like about addressing in MQL4? The fact that indexes of arrays start from 0? Or the fact that the indexing of rows is in the opposite direction?

And what are the problems with parameter passing? I do not see any problems within one module. With libraries and external DLLs is a little more complicated, but with the introduction of classes, the problem with the libraries will be solved. And working with external DLLs will always be a challenge, I think it's obvious why.
 
Better:
Gain Capital - already quietly working, FXCM - launching MT4 soon.
CFDs do not work on MTs yet. Or rather, it works in such a truncated form, at least where I have seen it, that it would be better not to work.

Maybe I should have said at the beginning, although it's not the point, that I personally have no problem programming everything I want. And I personally have no problem with access to CFD. Although I always want "more and better".
I'm just annoyed that a good product keeps leaving traders-users who are able to pay, for programmers who are only good at making demo programs. I do not want to see further technical improvement without active commercial development, without promotion of the product to the masses of dealing centres. Dealing centres that really work on the market, not kitchens that creatively filter prices and hunt for lost deposits. To be trading, not gambling. "Every gopher is his own agronomist". I'm not going to tell the methaquotes how to do business, they are adults and I don't know their inner workings to advise them on anything. That's just my opinion. You can take it into account, or you can ignore it. But let me remind you once again of history, which should still teach thinking people.
 
( like timbo described - "Если нужно купить, то просто buy(количество) и всё, никаких заморочек.")

Doesn't he have the guts to write his own function?

int slipp;
int TP;
int SL;
 
switch Period()
  {
     case PERIOD_M1 : slipp=1; TP=10; SL=10; break;
     case PERIOD_M5 : slipp=2; TP=15; SL=15; break;
     case PERIOD_M15: slipp=3; TP=20; SL=20; break;
     case PERIOD_M30: slipp=4; TP=30; SL=30; break;
     case PERIOD_H1 : slipp=5; TP=50; SL=50; break;
     .
     .
     .
  }
 
int Buy_(Vol)
  {
    return OrderSend(Symbol(),OP_BUY,Vol,Ask,slipp,Ask-SL*Point,Ask+TP*Point,"xxx",0,0,Green);
  }
 
bstone:

How did you come to this conclusion regarding my knowledge? Please share.

What don't you like about addressing in MQL4? The fact that indexes of arrays start from 0? Or the fact that the indexing of rows is in the opposite direction?

And what are the problems with parameter passing? I do not see any problems within one module. With libraries and external DLLs is a little more complicated, but with the introduction of classes, the problem with the libraries will be solved. And working with external DLLs will always be a challenge, I think it's obvious why.
1) I see that you are claiming your skills on other software and you believe in MQL-4.
2. When you try to program in a structured way, MQL-4 gives all sorts of stuff,
This forces normal experienced programmers to write unstructured, i.e. even unstructured.
Look at the codebase, because professionals wrote it.
 
Korey:

1. from this I conclude that you claim to be qualified on other software and you believe in MQL-4

I've implemented very complex MTS in MQL4 (for example, the TS, based on Elliot waves, Andrews' Pitchfork, the dynamic analysis of tens and hundreds of trend lines, resistances and supports - that's to understand the order of complexity we are talking about in terms of implementing such systems in MQL4). So I think I can reasonably say that I don't just believe in MQL4 - I have great experience in developing trading (and not only) systems on this platform.

2. When you try to program structurally, MQL-4 gives you all sorts of things,
This forces normal experienced programmers to write in bulk, i.e. even in unstructured form.

My experience also allows me to say that I have very deep knowledge in structural programming. So far, all my requests to give at least one practical example of MQL4 failure in terms of development using this approach have remained unanswered. So I made a conclusion that your initial statements were somewhat premature, since you have nothing to support them with.

Look at the codebase, because professionals wrote it.

Perhaps we have slightly different notions of professionalism. What is in the code base is not written by professionals. This is development by members of the MQL community where professional programmers can be counted on the fingers of one hand. And no one is hiding it and is not saying that this is a bad thing. Therefore, you can not judge the features or problems of the MQL4 language by the code from the code base. On the contrary, the code in the code base is quite eloquent as to why MQL was originally designed for programmers, not traders.
 

The topic itself is uninteresting, and incomprehensible...
But here are a couple of points if you want to comment please.

timbo писал (а):
CFD пока не работает на МТ. Вернее работает в таком усеченном виде, по крайней мере там где я это видел, что лучше бы и не работал.

I don't want to see further technical improvement without active commercial development, without promoting the product to the masses of dealing centres. Dealing centres that actually work in the market, rather than kitchens that creatively filter prices and hunt for drained depots.

1. That's nearly three years I closely use CDF for futures and ru shares...
I've looked this way and that, but I still don't understand the meaning of your phrase about "it doesn't work".

2. Well, DCs are clear... There are many of them, nevertheless there are banks that use MTs, including in Russia.
By the way ... it is the banking laws that do not allow the use of MTs for nothing.
And there are two extremes here, either to somehow adapt MT in a more legal way, which is quite feasible, but a bit stressful.
Or you can modify MT to meet the requirements, but then we'll get at best a Rumus... :))), but do we need it?
I don't think so... and we have to break the backwards laws of the last century...

 
Registr:

Having trouble driving a car? Buy a scooter and sleep well...


Why do you have to be rude and familiar?
What's that from?
 
I share the concerns of the topicstarter. Why bother with classes and other nonsense when a great product can't reach the market? Not because the competition is strong, but because it just doesn't fit the "banking friction".
 
timbo:
It's just a shame that a good product is drifting further and further away from the user traders, who are solvent, to the programmers, who for the most part are only good at making demos.

And there are too many cars on the road, bought on credit, and the real guys have nowhere to go!
 
kombat:
1. I've been working closely with CDF on futures and ru-share for almost three years now...

I looked this way and that way, but I still don't understand what you mean by "it doesn't work".

A few questions: how many stocks of all varieties are available for trading (I don't know about market size of ru-share, but top 500 would suit me), how is order size discreteness determined (correct answer should be one stock), how do quotations of DC and exchange relate, how do you pay for each order - spread or commission (for last two questions I expect that prices are the same without filtering, requotes and creative spread, but you pay commission)? If your answers coincide with mine, then I will be forced to admit that it works to the fullest for ru shares.

I don't want to sound like a snob, but I don't perceive "banks in Russia" as reliable financial structures and therefore they don't exist as banks to me. The general instability of everything and memories of '98, in particular, are my excuse.
123456789...12
New comment
Reason: