Ambitious ideas !!! - page 3

New comment
 

HIDDEN, God forbid, I have nothing against you personally and frankly I don't care who writes on what. It's just that your topic lacks any specifics, and I'm quoting:

В MT5 нас много чего лишили, лишения эти фундаментальны по своей природе. В MT5 нам затмили глаза функционалом.

Can you be more specific, "a lot of things", is that what exactly? The only fundamental difference is the switch to netting. Working with netting itself in MT5 is very inefficient when it comes to multicurrency systems. However, all these problems are solved with OOP. You can organize any data structures, you can deploy complex dynamic classes. Only in such complex but very effective data structures it is possible to fit the entire functionality of a multicurrency Expert Advisor trading with tens of strategies at the same time. In MT4 you can't do this because it's not only not OOP, but it's not even a full-fledged procedural programming language. It has no structures, no dynamically allocated memory, no dangerous but flexible addressing via pointers. In terms of functionality, MT4 is rather a QBASIC of the 80s.

Assumptions or facts?

It's an assumption built on ironclad facts. Only enthusiastic lockers are trying to convince the public that MT5 is an incomplete product because it doesn't have any locs. In reality, there is not and cannot be a single situation in which a strategy that works in MT4 would not work in MT5. In general, in reality it is just the opposite, netting allows paying less commissions and swaps, which makes it less profitable for kitchens, but more preferable for serious brokers.

 
Avals:
It depends on what to write for. If you take trading and the needs of most users, then FP is enough for their needs.
Well, "enough" and "more convenient" are a little different concepts :) . But for "Drag Trade" functionality of 4K was enough for me, although with OOP it would probably be more beautiful, convenient and extensible.
 
Trading systems are becoming more complex. The code is growing in both depth and breadth. Gone are the days of writing MACD Sample type EAs. Modern trading systems require modern functionality. MQL4 is morally outdated, its further support and development makes no sense. Those who disagree with it will either change their beliefs or change their jobs. In any case, soon those people, as well as the MT4 product itself will be remembered in history classes for beginners who will sincerely wonder how they could trade without netting.
 
TheXpert:
Bullshit of the month.

Why is it nonsense? Just calculate how many pointers it takes to get to the right data or function.

If you know how to count. :)

 

C-4:

However, all of these problems can be solved with OOP. You can organise any data structures, you can deploy complex dynamic classes.

Suppose there is a "complex dynamic class" that is cunningly spawned from other cunningly spawned classes. So what? In the end, a specific function will calculate everything. Well, was it really worth building a garden for the sake of such circus tricks?
 
TheXpert:
Maybe a bit of a stretch, but pure FP is a bygone era.
OOP is also a thing of the past. The current trend is hardware-oriented programming, which is mostly in C, such as CUDA. With release of processors with integrated GPU this will be further enhanced. Processor companies plan to stop producing only universal processor cores eventually.
 
You should first digest the mush in your head, then try to talk intelligently with the people :)
 
TheXpert:
You should first digest the mush in your head, then try to talk intelligently with the people :)
Actually, flooding is not very welcome here. Do you have something concrete and meaningful to say?
 
Andrei01:
Flooding is actually not very welcome here. Is there anything concrete and meaningful you can argue with?

:)))))))))))))))
 
Settle down.
123456789
New comment