What is this programming for? - page 6
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
In general, there is a lot that is not posted on the internet. Especially things that are of value.
I'm not going to post my Fourier work either. No one has even come close to this idea yet.
It takes months and years to develop such ideas. Those who develop them know the value of them and the consequences of their dissemination even for money.
Are you so sure that no one in the world knows Fourier analysis but you? How many monographs on spectral analysis have you studied? Suppose for a variant what would you say about Pisarenko method - how it is better (worse) than Fourier method?
Are you so sure that no one in the world knows Fourier analysis but you? How many monographs on spectral analysis have you studied? Suppose as an option, what would you say about Pisarenko method - how it is better (worse) than Fourier method?
One officer served in GSVG, there he bought the book with solutions of all termekh problems from Meshcherskiy. But they didn't let him out with this book, customs officers took it away.
Like this,
Meshchersky is ours, he's "ancient", but it's impossible to take his solutions to Meshchersky's homeland)))
Are you so sure that no one in the world knows Fourier analysis but you? How many monographs on spectral analysis have you studied? Suppose optionally, what would you say about Pisarenko method - how it is better (worse) than Fourier method?
The point is not in Fourier but in the way it is applied. Pisarenko can also be used in my method.
I decided to create a post for people who want to learn... I'm not discouraging anyone, I'm not urging anyone not to learn, I'm just expressing my point of view... That's not able to write, I was not able at all, and it seemed to me that I'll learn and all, and that's the end of the market, yachts, islands, etc. .... I spent a month to read articles on "programming for dummies" (much better than textbook, though, IMHO), then a textbook, then everything that I could... Killed my brain dead and what. Well, I learned how to draw squares and rectangles, I learned how to write the zazd... ...and averages, I learned how to write advisors... what little I've learned that I haven't learned... NO POINT =(((... Seriously... Everything I write turns out to be already on the Web and did not have to worry, everything I do not do-uh-huh... Look, a month later, the same algorithm was already in place, but a year earlier than yours...
I came to the following conclusions:
1. All of your thoughts are already available on the Net, and they have already been encoded by someone else and shared, and a few years before you have thought about it, you just need to look for it better. But of course, you will never believe it - you area prodigy...
2. If you're not Godzila or Roche, who is a programmer by vocation, and you don't care who DLL are and how Fourier differs from non-Fourier and why they are needed, you better not know, anyway same Roche or Godzila will explain it, if it will be necessary.
3. When your most unique ultra-megasuper pipshead appears, built on multinikalnym code ( as otherwise - you're a genius!!!), and he draws you in an hour yacht, two-island, three-continent, in four Bafet personal driver, you take the money you bring them to the real ... and watch the first hundred disappear, then the second, then the third... DO NOT BELIEVE THE TALES OF A MILLION BILLION IN TWO DAYS.
4. It's easier to pay 10-20 quid to be coded by a normal programmer, than to force your brain for three months, wasting time which you can afford (for example, extra work) to earn money to write 100-150 advisors and indicators ...
5. It's much easier, if you have learned how to program and decided that now you are going to break the neck of the universe, that you are the supreme Bodhisattva of the market and everyone is ... knockout - I think you're talking out of your ass =(((.
Actually you don't have to program, you don't even have to understand what a cycle means, surf the net and you'll find what you need...
If you're not a programmer by vocation, do not force your brain, better pay - let them write, it will be less hassle for you.
If you decide that you're going to be cooler than Godzila or Rosh-amitriptyline to help you.
I apologize in advance to the author of this thread... ...in case I hit a nerve or offend you or something...
But if programming breaks your brain that much, maybe it's just not yours?
Maybe you should be a caretaker... or a janitor... you don't have to break your brain there... just broom and that's it...
no stress !!!
And the idea is... If you don't have the brains to do something, there's no need to whine about the difficulty... just find something you can do...
If you want to do something, chew on it slowly... (I have several examples from my life when my acquaintances who are not distinguished by genius, purely by persistence, assiduity and capacity for work have done a lot... BUT NO ONE WHINED THAT EVERYTHING IS COMPLICATED...).
Everyone wants a big button "+1000$" to the account... and most importantly, no pressure!
Sorry again. Didn't mean to offend anyone...
And the thought is... If you don't have the brains to do something, there's no need to whine about the difficulty... just find something you can do...
And if you want to do something, chew on it slowly... (I have a few examples from my life, when my acquaintances, who are not distinguished by genius, purely persistence, assiduity and capacity for work did a lot... BUT NO ONE WHINED THAT EVERYTHING IS COMPLICATED...).
Everyone wants a big button "+1000$" to the account... ...with no pressure!
Sorry again. Didn't mean to offend anyone...
Hmmm, and I have one -- if you don't have the brains, find the brains to match the abilities.
There are two sets -- traders and programmers, the intersection of these two sets is much smaller than each of them separately.
You're suggesting that all traders (not programmers) should forget about MTS simply because they can't implement it.
Hmm, you don't cut out your appendix yourself, there are doctors for that.
Besides, I think it's BETTER for a non-programmer to order the system to a programmer by the ratio of time killed -- quality -- cost.
For example, the author of this thread wrote that he spent a month on learning the language. I wrote my first Expert Advisor in 2 days after getting acquainted with the language. All I had was the reference book and MACD Sample, that's all.
The second example, the code quality. Sorry, if I offend you, but I'm discouraged by Expert Advisors that are absolutely buried in a start function with variable names per1 pre2 ... ...and most often with errors that require global rework. Especially the big ones.
Thirdly, the time to implement the idea differs many times, sometimes by an order of magnitude or more.
However, I believe that all the same, learning the language and its features will be useful to non-programmers.
1. They will know the limitations of the language
2. They can more clearly describe the algorithm of their ideas.
3. They will be able to adequately evaluate a programmer's work
All the above is completely my IMHO.
Oh, and about the button. Yes, I WANT such a button, but I'm working for it like an elephant. Comes out 60-70 hours a week -- 40 at work and 20-30 on the button.
And don't think that programmer's work is easy. When you come home with a cast-iron head, because of the release, bugs that either can't be reproduced or are not fixed, and you sit down at your computer and work further - "on the button" - it is very hard.
A normal human, correct subject.
Hmm, and I have one -- if you don't have the brains, find brains that fit the ability.
There are two sets -- traders and programmers; the intersection of these two sets is much smaller than each of them separately.
You're suggesting that all traders (not programmers) should forget about MTS simply because they can't implement it.
Hmm, you don't cut out your appendix yourself, there are doctors for that.
Besides, I think it's BETTER for a non-programmer to order the system to a programmer by the ratio of time killed -- quality -- cost.
For example, the author of the topic wrote that he spent a month learning the language. I wrote my first Expert Advisor in 2 days after the first acquaintance with the language and the only study aids I had were Reference and MACD Sample, that's all.
The second example, the code quality. Sorry, if I offend you, but I'm discouraged by Expert Advisors that are absolutely buried in a start function with variable names per1 pre2 ... ...and most often with errors that require global rework. Especially the big ones.
Thirdly, the time to implement the idea differs many times, sometimes by an order of magnitude or more.
However, I believe that all the same, learning the language and its features will be useful to non-programmers.
1. They will know the limitations of the language
2. They can more clearly describe the algorithm of their ideas.
3. They will be able to adequately evaluate a programmer's work
All the above is completely my IMHO.
Oh, and about the button. Yes, I WANT such a button, but I'm working for it like an elephant. That's about 60-70 hours a week -- 40 on the job and 20-30 on the button.
And don't think that programmer's work is easy. When you come home with a cast-iron head, because there is a release coming up, bugs that either cannot be reproduced or are not fixed, and you sit down at your computer and continue working - "on the button" - it's very hard.
? Who would take on the tasks of:
1. Make a table describing in detail the questions that need to be answered in the algorithm to make it easier for the programmer
2. Make a table of characteristics of EAs, their categories of complexity
3. Make a price list for each cell of the table
4. Make a table where the quality of completed work would be assessed by the customer, and then, if the access to the code and the expert rating group of the website or the jury of the forum
5. To put it all together.
A normal human, correct topic.
? Who would take on the tasks of:
1. Make a table with the most detailed description of the questions that need to be answered in the algorithm to make it easier for the programmer
2. Make a table of EA characteristics, their difficulty categories
3. Make a price list for each cell of the table
4. Make a table where the quality of the work would be evaluated by the customer, and then, if access to the code and the expert rating group of the site or the jury of the forum
5. Bring it all together.
Who said it would be easy?
Either find a common language with the programmers, or break the teeth on the granite of science itself.
1. Trust me, there will still be questions. Besides, there MUST be a lot of questions. The fewer the questions, the less likely you are to get what you want.
2. why? There's a price, isn't there a measure? Another good indicator is the amount of net time spent.
3. ty, normal people will come to an agreement.
4. The quality of the work done is measured by compliance with the terms of reference and absence of errors. I think we can do without expert groups. It is up to the experts to run the best stories and analyze the rates. Indicators are more complicated, but also solvable.
Who says it will be easy?
Either find a common language with programmers, or break your teeth on the granite of science yourself.
1. Believe me, there will still be questions. Besides, there MUST be a lot of questions. The fewer the questions, the less likely you are to get what you want.
2. why? There is a price, isn't there a measure? Another good measure is the amount of pure time spent.
3. ty, normal people will come to an agreement.
4. We judge quality by TT-specification and absence of mistakes. I think we can do without expert groups. It is up to the experts to run the best stories and analyze the rates. Indicators are more complicated, but still manageable.
1. How do I know which one is a qualified programmer and which one isn't?
2. I keep secrets from many organizations, where is the guarantee that the person I don't know is the same
3. I have no idea about the level of prices.
4. Yes, the questions will remain, but there will be far fewer of them, and the TK algorithm template will be constantly improving
5. Even just having a template will allow the customer to structure their ideas
6. Programmers will receive orders as if they come from a sack of peas, and we will get rid of days of incorrect pouring out of ... в ...
7. If you are anexpert, you cannot use the programmer's price quotes (estimation of the price) in the form of bars on D1 in MT4 (I suggested this idea to managers in Cyprus by phone and explained that it is worth millions (I think everyone understand where it can be applied), but they have not understood it, and I have lost patience).
P.S. Let those who do not value their time and health break their teeth
1. how do i know which programmers are qualified and which are not?
2. I keep secrets from many organisations, where is the guarantee that someone I don't know is the same
3. I have absolutely no idea about the level of prices.
4. Yes, there will still be questions, but there will be far fewer, and the TK algorithm template will be constantly improving
5. Even just having a template will allow the customer to structure their ideas
6. Programmers will receive orders as if they come from a sack of peas, and we will get rid of days of incorrect pouring out of ... в ...
7. If you are anexpert, you cannot use the programmer's price quotes (estimation of the price) in the form of bars on D1 in MT4 (I suggested this idea to managers in Cyprus by phone and explained that it is worth millions (I think everyone understand where it can be applied), but they have not understood it, and I have lost patience).
P.S. Let those who do not value their time and health break their teeth
1. by experience. However, the unskilled ask for less....
2... You are not trustworthy, however. You will not get that kind of assurance even from someone you know very well.
4. 5. Why not? You could try.
7. Can you be more specific?