Will OOP be in demand in MQL5? - page 5
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
Svinozavr писал(а) >>
Well, why not for yourself?
In my old memory, it's more familiar somehow. We must get used to it.
I need an article. I'll be waiting. Everyone is waiting. Only there, as I understand it, is also "bye")).
We will see there. The codes for the article will still be finalized.
I'm writing for myself straight away using OOP. Slowly. Not for publication.
I see. Just judging by the posts in this thread, it seemed that just give the possibility of OOP, so immediately. At least that's what me and each other were actively convinced of.
Ok. Indeed, two weeks from beta only. Let's wait.
But agree, it would be interesting to see the OOP at least in your published indicator! Listen, an idea! Why don't you rewrite it using OOP in your article or just as a variant of your published indicator? It would be very clear: here is the same indicator in two implementations - procedural and OOP.
There are people who want to be told about their software - that's OOP. If there are people who like to discuss the intricacies of OOP. There are programs that are written using OOP. And that's fine. At the same time, wine or linux is not OOP by 95%.
That is, of course, there is a theory, as it could be, if you write in OOP, and there is a programming practice, in which OOP is not always used.
PS. When there was a poll "what else do you need in mt5" - I said at once, give me records, - I don't need classes for nothing. At the same time, I am shamelessly trying to write programs in Delphi, which is exactly the OOP itself.
Svinozavr писал(а) >>
But, after all, agree, it would be interesting to see at least your published indicator on OOP! Listen, an idea! Why don't you rewrite it using OOP in your article or just as a variant of your published indicator? It would be very clear: here is the same indicator in two implementations - procedural and OOP.
Well, where to get rid of the procedural style, if it is imposed by default?
Compare at least the number of built-in objects and functions. Or the implementation itself - I mean functions OnCalculate OnInit OnDeinit OnTick, etc.
In an article, then, if I find effective places to apply it. However, I've probably already found it.
Well, what can we do without the procedural style if it is imposed by default?
At least compare the number of built-in objects and functions. Or the implementation itself -- meaning OnCalculate OnInit OnDeinit OnTick, etc.
Yes, I agree. That's why I partly opened this topic.
In an article, then, if I find effective places to apply it. But I've already found it.
It will be very interesting to read. Thank you.
TheXpert писал(а) >>
In an article, then, if I find effective places to apply. However, I may have already found some.
Well, how hard it is to write in MQL5 after C++ in OOP style...
Наверное ZUP от nen'а будет неплохим примером. Там много чего наворочено. Одна только масса исходника внушает уважение (368Kb v82), не говоря уже о содержании.
Hee hee... My project archive weighs 7 MB. EX4 expert 800 kb, indicator 100 kb, and there's also scripts and a bunch of libraries...
And all this is without OOP. My point is not that you don't need OOP.Hee hee... My project archive weighs 7 MB. EX4 expert 800 kb, indicator 100 kb, and there's also scripts and a bunch of libraries...
And all this without OOP. My point is not that you don't need OOP.Ho-ho... Your project will be just as good an example.
It seems that people who criticise OOP just don't know it. Before talking about OOP, it is a good idea to study it using C++ as an example. Judging by talks that C++ is a perversion for it does not remind a logic of human languages, one can determine that the author is rather superficially acquainted with the language. Master the work with STL library perfectly and then you can speculate on the advantages and disadvantages of OOP, but for now, without knowing the subject, get smarter, not get involved in wild goose chases.
Most people associate OOP with a particular programming language - C++, MQ5 is OOP, C, MQ4 is not OOP. This is not correct. OOP exists even in C, yet for some reason many people don't know about it, which again indicates superficial knowledge.