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 used a template like this:
it's a little different.
I see two blocks in the code too, one at the beginning and one at the end... but I need one.
The one at the end is irrelevant to tracing. You can delete it.
Yes. I see. But still... we don't look at errors, we look at each input to the function.
Yes. I can see that. But still... We don't look at errors, we look at each input to the function.
Errors can be thrown out, too.
Mistakes can be thrown out, too.
:))
the task (if you read the first post) comes down to adding just one service-function to each function in the source code - right after "{".
But in such a way to get all passages of source code and build a call tree.
It doesn't change input parameters of source functions in any way, nor does it change results or code inside
... Is Mql the right language to do tracing in!!!
It's not about pure trace. It's just about constructing a function graph.
It's not about pure trace. Only about building the function graph.
The code is broken into functions (blocks) and then it is analyzed who calls whom.
... Is Mql the right language to do tracing in!!!
Why not, if you want to.
:))
the problem (if you read the first post) comes down to adding just one service-function to each function in the source code - right after "{".
But in such a way to get all source code passes and build the call tree.
Is it not obvious that this task is unsolvable? That way we could eliminate pairs of arithmetic () [] and operator {} brackets and replace them with a single opening one. Would that be too bad?
;)