Is there a need for a lock in MT5? - page 40
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
I see that you are obsessed with loco-phobia. And you keep suggesting that traders - not programmers - should rework the EAs they use. This is despite the fact that they:
1. Do not know how to program.
2. They are not the authors of the Expert Advisors and may not know the logic of their work.
3. They do not even have all the source codes of all the Expert Advisors, the license for the use of which they have purchased from various authors.
I have written to you about it more than once, but you do not seem to notice these arguments. You bet I do! It's impossible to respond to them with counterarguments!
What can I say/do to them? I answer/do what I can - explain that everything can be solved. What do you want from me? For me to take Renat hostage and demand the cancellation of the net???
Or volunteered to rewrite their EAs for everyone under the net??? What do you want from me?
I'm tired of saying - lock is neither good nor bad. The lock is not necessary for the logic of the EA.
I see that you are obsessed with loco-phobia. And you keep suggesting that traders - not programmers - should rework the EAs they use. This is despite the fact that they:
1. Do not know how to program.
2. They are not the authors of the Expert Advisors and may not know the logic of their work.
3. They do not even have all the source codes of all the Expert Advisors, the license for the use of which they have purchased from various authors.
I have written to you about it more than once, but you do not seem to notice these arguments. You bet I do! You cannot argue with counterarguments against them!
Everyone in this thread has their eyes blinded...
1. Do they know how to trade? They make money (otherwise the system would not work)? They may have to hire a programmer.
2. Authors are there to know and know how to do everything, maintain their product, or make changes requested by the user for an extra fee.
3. see point 2.
What is not a counter-argument?) But it's all empty, locomotives will soon be nowhere and never, a relic of trading in the air in the "kitchen", we must learn to work without them. It does not matter whether we are for or against it. And the sooner those who can not live without them, the better for them ... That's what we are fighting for, making it clear...).
Z.U. And for the 5 all the same advisers to remake...(.
What can I answer/do? I answer/do what I can - I explain that everything is solvable. What do you want me to do? For me to take Renat hostage and demand that he cancel the net???
Or voluntarily rewrite their councillors under neto for everyone??? What do you want me to do?
I'm tired of saying - lock is neither good nor bad. The lock is not necessary for logic of advisor's work.
Ok, I'll put the question differently.
You do not doubt that one account can trade profitably and get along (in mt4),
I don't think there is any doubt that scalper and medium-term trader can trade profitably in one account (mt4).
The timing of the trade may be different. I myself am not a supporter of purely losing systems.
But it's inevitable in scalper and medium-term strategy operation.
Personally, you may, without changing the logic of both Expert Advisors
obtain the same result in MT5 based on the work of two separate Expert Advisors?
We cannot consider an alternative with two accounts and working with different symbols.
You cannot use only one symbol. One account and fixed lot.
The refusal from one of the systems could not be considered as well!
Everyone in this thread has their eyes glazed over...
1. Know how to trade? Make money (otherwise why bother with the system)? They must be able to hire a programmer.
2. Authors are there to know and know how to do everything, maintain their product, or make changes requested by the user for an extra fee.
3. see point 2.
What is not a counter-argument?) But it's all empty, locomotives will soon be nowhere and never, a relic of trading in the air in the "kitchen", we must learn to work without them. It does not matter whether we are for or against it. And the sooner those who can not live without them, the better for them ... That's what we are fighting for, we clarify ...)
Not arguments. Authors can refuse to tweak their EA to fit someone else's EA. In addition, why should a rich trader pay for the whims of MQ programmers?
If brokerage companies don't support locks - disable this feature in MT5, if they do - turn it on, and everyone is happy. If you do not like it, go to another brokerage company that has locks.
If you do not like them, you may go to another brokerage firm where they have locks. This means that there will be no lots.
But it's all for naught, there will soon be no locals anywhere and ever, a relic of trading in the air in the 'kitchen', we have to learn to work without them. It does not matter whether we are for or against it. And the sooner those who can not live without them, the better for them ... That's what we are fighting for, making it clear...).
Z.I. And for the 5 all the same advisers to remake ...(
Loki implemented in Dukas. Kitchen?
The problem is not the locs, it's the reliability of accounting for the structure of the aggregate position. In the current state of MT5 this is not the case.
You do not doubt that they can trade profitably and get along (in mt4) on the same account,
I have never doubted that two EAs may trade profitably on one account (in MT4).
You may ask them to copy two EAs into one and work with one joint position. It takes a programmer about ten minutes....
OK, I'll put the question differently.
You do not doubt that in one account can trade profitably and get along (in mt4),
Scalper and medium-term trader can trade profitably in one account (mt4).
The timing of the trade may be different. I myself am not a supporter of purely losing systems.
But it's inevitable in scalper and medium-term strategy operation.
Personally, you may, without changing the logic of both Expert Advisors
obtain the same result in MT5 based on the work of two separate Expert Advisors?
I cannot consider an alternative with two accounts and working with different symbols.
You cannot use only one symbol. One account and fixed lot.
The refusal from one of the systems could not be considered!
Each of the Expert Advisors may have a trailing stop and many other conditions when closing positions. The holding time, the opposite signal of indices, etc.
That is not clear take and stop.
It's elementary, you put your two EAs into one, and work with one aggregate position... It takes the programmer about ten minutes....
You're a programmer and sell the license to use your Expert Advisor. I come here and say, give me your source code and I give it to my programmer, so he combines your Expert Advisor with the EA of another sucker, for whom I have made the source code. What is your answer?
OK, I'll put the question differently.
You do not doubt that in one account can trade profitably and get along (in mt4),
Scalper and medium-term trader can trade profitably in one account (mt4).
The timing of the trade may be different. I myself am not a supporter of purely losing systems.
But it's inevitable in scalper and medium-term strategy operation.
Personally, you may, without changing the logic of both Expert Advisors
obtain the same result in MT5 based on the work of two separate Expert Advisors?
I cannot consider an alternative with two accounts and working with different symbols.
You cannot use only one symbol. One account and fixed lot.
If you do not want to trade with one of the systems, don't do it either!
i would like to repeat the post i read on my website... http://forum.alpari.ru/showthread.php?p=1530039#post1530039
====
everything will work the same old way....
for example
- we have a chart like this.
/\/\/\/\/\//\ back and forth in a flat 20 pips...
the old one (mt4).
we have two systems, one works only for Buy and the other only for Sell...
The buy system places a trade - TP 20 SL20 - when the SL is reached
either open a new deal lot *2 or simply add Bai lot=1
B(2)/\B4/\B6/\B8/\
B(1)/B3\/B5\/B7\/B9\
total ba = 1 deal+20py
2=-20; 3=+40; 4=-20; 5=+40; 6=-20; 7=+40; 8=-20; 9=0 Total +60 pips
The village system at the same time exposes
s(2)/\s4/\S6/\S8/\
S(1)/S3/S5/S7/S9\
also TP 20 SL 20... the results of the trades
1=-20; 2=+40; 3=-20; 4=+40; 5=-20; 6=+40; 7=-20; 8=+40; 9=0; Total +80pips,
Total in MT4 = +140pips
--------
now let's consider in MT5
there, when I open a Buy position and close it with a Sell deal
immediately considering results of 1...8 trades
1B1S=0;
1S(which closes 1By) 2B(lot=2) = -20 ...
then 2-nd system (village) opens its Sell trade, lot=2 2S = +40 ..;
etc...
3B+403S-20 = +20;
4B+204S+40 = +20;
5B+405S-20 = +20;
6B-206S+40 = +20;
7B+407S-20 = +20;
8B-208S+40 = +20;
A total of +140 pips... same result as MT4....
Locke is a MUST for EA logic.
The wording is somewhat incorrect...
So: lock is not necessary to be applied in ... if there is one in the system.
Simply put, you can use it or not.
In yours it's one-sided, you don't use it and you don't have it.
Naturally you can not use it...
)))
2. The creators are there to know and know how to do everything, provide support for their product or make changes requested by the user for an extra fee.
Tell it to the artists, when Adobe will change their brushes to sharpened matchsticks.
;)))
You don't doubt Adobe as a developer who knows "how to"?