[WARNING CLOSED!] Any newbie question, so as not to clutter up the forum. Professionals, don't go by. Can't go anywhere without you. - page 235
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
Hello, I'm asking for help from the knowledgeable, my indicator does not want to draw by the flow, I have to constantly switch frames to update it to the last bar, how can I fix this shortcoming? I am very thankful for it.
You can't test it without the second indicator.
Without a second indicator, there is still no way to check.
Sorry! I stand corrected :)
Sorry! I stand corrected :)
It works, of course, but the brakes are terrible. It is necessary to transfer calculations of the auxiliary indicator to the main one. In general it would be better to optimize calculations.
It works, of course, but the brakes are terrible. It is necessary to transfer calculations of the auxiliary indicator to the main one. In general, it would be better to optimize the calculations.
Thank you very much for your help! And another question along the way, how can I optimize the calculations, and how best to normalize the MACD to run within certain limits? I'm just far from the details and programming that's why all I could find a more or less suitable is the normalizer seen above :)
Thank you very much for your help! And another question along the way, how can I optimize the calculations, and how best to normalize the MACD to run within certain limits? I'm just far from the details and programming that's why all I could find more or less suitable is the normalizer shown above :)
There may be many optimization options. I didn't really get into the code.
Thank you very much for your help! I've got another question, what's the best way to optimise the calculation, and how to normalise the MAKD to keep it within the limits I've defined? I'm just far from the hardware and programming that's why all I could find more or less suitable is the normalizer seen above :)
You are using a variant that was posted on the code base, it is just a concept and is not optimized for performance. For practical purposes I suggest to set the characteristic_period variable manually from external variables, selecting it in such a way, that 3-4 full cycles of the main indicator occur during the given number of periods
Another option - which I personally use more often - is to specify the number of days for the run from the outside and convert them to characteristic_period in the indicator's body
It's not working out...when you read all these EAs here, but I only have MM, I would like to have a little maturity expectation of +.... eh...
Is the mathematical expectation -0.12 normal without optimization in a long time interval? I mean everybody gets it without optimisation and then expectation goes up by fitting, or it is not an option and I should change EA completely?