Is it possible to implement a RELIABLE accounting of the aggregate position structure in MT5? - page 4
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
Here we go again with the whole loco thing. What do lots have to do with it? We are talking about elementary accounting of the system behaviour, not about the trader's strategy, so it's off topic.
And as for the accounting, any station may use mages (which are now called ORDER_EXPERT) to quickly calculate its participation in the current position according to the history of trades and orders. It's just a few lines of text and instant execution.
A way through the history of FILLED orders was originally suggested. But this is unreliable, even if the whole history (which could be tens of thousands of orders) would be available and instantly readable.
You see, the accounting of position structure is necessary only from the point of view of the stock ideology - schizophrenia with bifurcation, splitting, etc.. I have been trading for a long time - in real life (stock exchange) it all looks strange, to say the least.
And do you take net positions on forward deals as well?
By your logic, if there is only one Expert Advisor, then manual trading is wrong too.
Wrong if it is on the same instrument as the EA. Otherwise, what is it doing there? Only in case of force majeure. You also invite your friends and neighbours - give them access to conduct operations.
Imagine you have an EA with Magic. At a certain point, when the position of this EA was in deficit, you decided that you are fed up with everything and want to rest. You delete the EA and close the open position by hand with a counter market order with Magic 0. When you return from holiday and decide to run the same Expert Advisor, it sees that its position is open based on analysis of the Magic history.
A oblique example, but you can get the idea.
A way through the history of FILLED orders was originally suggested. But this is unreliable, even if the entire history (which may be tens of thousands of orders) is available and instantly readable.
And what is the unreliability in this? After all, this is the history of forming your position. How can it be unreliable?
Wrong if it is on the same instrument as the EA. Otherwise, what is it doing there? Only in case of force majeure. You also invite your friends and neighbours - give them access to conduct operations.
Let's not reduce the thread about the possibility of RELIABLE accounting of aggregate position structure in MT5 to the unnecessity of such accounting and its logical inadequacy.
Let's not reduce the thread about the possibility of RELIABLE accounting of aggregate position structure in MT5 to the uselessness of such accounting and its logical inaccuracy/incorrectness.
It's not me who is reducing, it's you who is reducing with your structure so necessary for you which is formed by your approach to trading. Change your approach - there will be no problem. There will be nothing to pander to.
Can you elaborate on the unreliability? After all, this is the story of the formation of your position. How can it be unreliable.
Answered just above.
Imagine you have an EA with Magic. At a certain point, when the position of this EA was in deficit, you decided that you are fed up with everything and want to rest. You delete the EA and close the open position by hand with a counter market order with Magic 0. When you return from holiday and decide to run the same Expert Advisor, it sees that its position is open based on analysis of the Magic history.
A oblique example, but you can get the idea.
In this case, you insist that anything can be broken, but no one is arguing with this, but in this case you can manually enter the cherished word in the comment, which the EA's calculator will check if the ends will not converge (as a variant of handling of emergency events)
In this case, you insist that anything can be broken, but no one is arguing with this, but in this case you can manually enter the cherished word in the comment, which the Expert Advisor will check if the ends will not converge (as a variant of emergency event handling).
It is clear that there are some special cases, but there are no general ones. Here is the description of a not infrequent example:
Look through the past - it was suggested to make net accounting of locs in your account. Orders after this unsophisticated interface.
You are obsessed with locophobia. And all the time you suggest traders not programmers to redo the Expert Advisors 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 counter them with counter-arguments!