When does it make sense to keep part of the robot code in an indicator? - page 21
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
No problem. Actually, in order to make your analogue of IndicatorCounted, you need an array with history to scan in case you miss it, i.e. in this particular case you essentially need a full recalculation of each bar.
This is how I have such a scan going on. Only ugly DCs who retroactively correct their history are not taken into account. But that's a completely debatable question, and whether it's necessary to take into account what a DC draws retroactively.
How about another contest?
I realise that now you can come up with an example that I would have to wrap my head around. However, any EA with an indicator can be fully transferred to all-in-one. It is only a matter of time. Logic is logic as it is, the porting is only a matter of attentiveness and manual dexterity. You can create Expert Advisors without indicators.
I will be honest, I have not written any Expert Advisor using indicators. I have never called iCustom. I have never needed it. I have written indicators for visualization, but not for Expert Advisors. If I have written an indicator myself, it will work in "all-in-one" version without any problems.
1. that's how I have such a scan going on. Only the ugly DCs who retroactively correct their history are not counted. But it's quite a moot point whether or not you need to take into account what the DC draws retroactively.
2. I realise now you can come up with an example that I would have to puzzle over. However, any EA with an indicator can be fully transferred to all-in-one. It is only a matter of time. Logic is logic as it is, the porting is only a matter of attentiveness and manual dexterity. You can create Expert Advisors without indicators.
I will honestly say that I have not written any Expert Advisor using indicators. I have never called iCustom. I have never needed it. I have written indicators for visualization, but not for Expert Advisors. If you have written an indicator yourself, it will work in the "all-in-one" version without any problems.
1. You don't have such a scan. Do not mislead the readers.
2. No one is inventing any such examples, we are still talking about the same thing.
3. If you write this indicator specifically for an indicator, rather than for the whole in one, you can write it in such a way that the Expert Advisor on this indicator will work many times faster.
I realise now that I can come up with an example that I have to wrap my head around
1. You have no such scan.
Oh, come on, read the code. If the connection on M1 was broken for 10 minutes, then after the return of the connection the Expert Advisor will show absolutely correct values considering 10 missed bars.
And if a bar suddenly appeared/changed in history, it is a case of DT history drawing. And it is very debatable whether it is correct to take the drawn history into account in the analysis.
Oh, come on, read the code. If the connection on M1 was interrupted for 10 minutes, then after the return of the connection the Expert Advisor will show absolutely correct values, taking into account the 10 missed bars.
And if a bar suddenly appeared/changed in history, it is a case of DT history drawing. And it is very questionable whether the drawn history is correct in the analysis.
Sorry, there are some doubts. It seems you do not remember what we were talking about 15-20 minutes ago, turn over a couple of pages, refresh your memory. There was already a discussion about it, Victor answered the question in bold text, to which you replied with a long op-ed on the wrongness of the terminal.
Why? Zigzag. The previous example essentially didn't require the cost of buffers. This is the next most important distinction.
OK, let's have an EA that gets the value of the extreme already formed (not the redrawing part) top of the ZigZag through the indicator.
There are many ZigZags, so let's settle on the simplest one:
A swing size of at least N pips.
If you do not agree with the conditions, I will not continue. So I have already shown one variant, which was not suggested by me.
Alright, let's have an Expert Advisor that gets the value of the last already formed (not the redrawing part) top of the ZigZag through the indicator.
There are many ZigZags, so let's settle on the simplest one:
A swing size of at least N pips.
If you do not agree with the conditions, I will not continue. So, I have already shown one variant that was not suggested by me.
You know, not a problem and works very quickly. Only this kind of demand of yours looks like extortion, so you are more likely not to get it.
Sorry, there are some doubts. You don't seem to remember what we were talking about 15-20 minutes ago, just go back a few pages and refresh your memory.
I still don't see what you mean. About the painted story I will give you a simple example:
DC adds/changes just one bar retroactively out of bad intentions, but makes its OHLC values completely unrealistic (like a technical glitch, then they say. They apologize, and fix it back).
Any EA, for example based on MACs will receive completely different values from its indicator. Because the indicator will be recalculated with this bastard bar. And all logic to hell.
"All-in-one" will spit on such a bar drawing situation.
You know, not a problem and works very quickly. Only this kind of demand of yours looks like extortion, so you are more likely not to get it.
I never saw what you mean. About the drawn story I will give you a simple example:
DC adds/changes just one bar retroactively out of bad intentions, but makes its OHLC values completely unrealistic (like a technical failure, then they say. They apologize, and fix it back).
Any EA, for example based on MACs will receive completely different values from its indicator. Because the indicator will be recalculated with this bastard bar. And all logic to hell.
"All-in-one" will spit on such a bar drawing situation.
There was that, too. Exactly the same argument as poltergeist and water dripping from the ceiling.
With this approach to life, you should put on OZK and a gas mask and never take them off.