[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 796

New comment
 
artmedia70:
That's it... found it myself... instead of 100, it's 100.0 ... I'd kill myself ...

Well, what was I saying? You should have put 100.0 on that one.

So... who are you going to kill? ))) Suicide (just in case) is also a sin...

===
Yes. And read the textbook. Without all these horrors.))) About that - here. The paragraph about bringing in types.

 
Techno:

Here's a schematic. Not checked, but it must work, missing parts must be added from the original code. Red marked number, the change of which will increase the expectation, the number 2 means we wait for one candle. If you need 2 candles waiting put three, etc.



I understand the principle, THANK YOU! I'll connect it to the code and try it out :).

Please tell me, Techno, is variable work a stop triggered? - Right?

And another question - maybe not a tick, a bars? If I understand the logic of writing ... :))

 

Good afternoon, I really need help, please help. When I optimize my EA, I disconnect from the server in the terminal so that I have a fixed spread for the entire optimization period. I do this because my terminal is Alpari and I have to test my Expert Advisor on Alpari quotes and in Alpari it is known that the spread is floating. So, I noticed that if I use checkpoints method and connect with server I will optimize my EA in 20 minutes. And if I disable connection it takes 6-8 hours. I understood at once that the number of simulated ticks was changing. I left optimization and decided to do a usual test to find out if the number of simulated ticks would change if I disable connection. You can see the result in table below. As you can see when you disable connection in the terminal - the number of simulated ticks changes, and only when using checkpoint method. With other methods results of simulated ticks are the same.

The question is.

1. why the amount of simulated ticks changes when I disconnect connection with the server in the terminal (i.e. simply enter a wrong password to the account)

2. Why with 2 other methods viz. simulated ticks number is the same, regardless of whether there is communication or not.

Thanks)

 

somehow my post got lost

i got a tip: i used this in an indicator often:

int CountedBars=IndicatorCounted();
if(CountedBars< 0) CountedBars= 0;
if(CountedBars> 0) CountedBars--;
cnt = Bars - CountedBars;

for(int i = 0; i < cnt ;i++)

If you do automation based on this it's clear that nothing will work as IndicatorCounted() for an indicator and in an EA will not work. how to properly rework the stuffing of an indicator to make it work?

 
T-G:

somehow my post got lost

i got a tip: i used this in an indicator often:

if you do automation based on this it's clear that nothing will work as IndicatorCounted() for an indicator and it won't work in an EA. how to re-do the stuffing of an indicator correctly to make it work?

??? Open any Expert Advisor from the Code Base. Or look at the example in the tutorial.

If you need to embed indicator code in the Expert Advisor code, you can find the article "Embedding Indicators in the Expert Advisor Code" by N.Kositsyn. Why? It's all just a little pampering...)))

 
Svinozavr:

??? Open any codebase expert. Or see example in tutorial.

If you want to embed indicator code into the Expert Advisor's code, you can find the article "Embedding Indicators into Expert Advisor Code" by N. Kositsyn. What for? It's all just a little bit of fun...)))


Yes I need to embed code of Expert Advisor in EA and the first thing that waited was a failure because IndicatorCounted() shows 0 accordingly that's why I think how to overcome it.

then what are the "adult games" within this topic?

 
T-G:

Yes I need to embed EA code into EA and the first thing that waited was a failure because IndicatorCounted() shows 0 accordingly so I'm thinking how to overcome that.

what are the "adult games" in the context of this topic then?


IndicatorCounted() does not work in EAs. It is only intended for indicators. It may be worth extending the problem a bit. There are different ways of solving it. The easiest one is to optimize the indicator (but not always possible), you can transfer the calculations to the Expert Advisor, but again not always possible. You actually have to look at the indicator
 
a-0888:

Good afternoon, I really need help, please help. When I optimize my EA, I disconnect from the server in the terminal so that I have a fixed spread for the entire optimization period. I do this because my terminal is Alpari and I have to test my Expert Advisor on Alpari quotes and in Alpari it is known that the spread is floating. So, I noticed that if I use checkpoints method and connect with server I will optimize my EA in 20 minutes. And if I disconnect connection then it takes 6-8 hours. I understood at once that the number of simulated ticks was changing. I left optimization and decided to do a usual test to find out if the number of simulated ticks would change if I disable connection. You can see the result in table below. As you can see when you disable connection in the terminal - the number of simulated ticks changes, and only when using checkpoint method. With other methods results of simulated ticks are the same.

The question is.

1. why the amount of simulated ticks changes when I disconnect connection with the server in the terminal (i.e. simply enter a wrong password to the account)

2. Why with 2 other methods viz. simulated ticks number is the same, regardless of whether there is communication or not.

Thanks)


Optimising by control points is brutal, isn't it? What do you want to achieve with a crude method that shouldn't even be taken into account?
Only by ticks or by bars, if the Expert Advisor has an explicit control of opening a new bar and works only by these bars...
Therefore - why?
 
Svinozavr:

Well, what was I saying? You should have put 100.0 on that one.

So... who are you going to kill? ))) Suicide (just in case) is also a sin...

===
Yeah. Read a textbook, though. (So that you don't have to read those horrors.)) About this - here. The paragraph about bringing in types.

MUH!!! And about the textbooks, yes the horrors - I've read them, I know. Only it probably wasn't my day, for fuck's sake... :)
 
artmedia70:
Optimising by control points is brutal, isn't it? What do you want to achieve with a crude method that shouldn't even be taken into account?
Only by ticks or by bars, if the Expert Advisor has an explicit control of opening a new bar and works only by these bars...
Therefore - why?
It takes me 24-25 HOURS to process 1288 variants with the genetic method. I first thought it was from vinduk7 - maybe something does not connect, but now I do not know what to think:(((( such a feeling that everything possible is done to make life difficult for manuuuuuuuuu ....
1...789790791792793794795796797798799800801802803...1145
New comment