RBCI + TTF = Profit? - page 3

New comment
 
7Konstantin7:

crossing lines of different indicators are not fixed, self-defeating

zoom in to full

a little smaller and everything is different

my terminal does not load a bit, but these indicators are useless)

Only the RBCI moves when you change the scale, the TTF seems to be stable. I noticed it right away. It can be easily fixed by the following trick: on the timeframe, on which you are going to trade, zoom out as much as possible, removing the shift of the chart. Then go to the properties of the RBCI indicator and on the first page check the "Fix Minimum" and "Maximum" without changing the numbers in the windows. Now you can change the scale as you like - the entry points will remain in their places. If you change timeframe, you need to remove the ticks, squeeze the chart again, and then put the ticks back in place - to fix the new lows and highs.
 
Mathemat:

I don't think it should - apart from zero...

Amazing. I had already prepared for a minute load - but counted everything instantly (on the history of the clock to July 2006). You guys both need to change your stones...

I seem to have a quad-core Quad Q6600. It's about the number of bars in the window - I have it at 2147483647.

It doesn't load the CPU, it takes a long time to load - I have two minutes, then everything flies. But the next time it loads, you wait a long time again.

P. S: Checked it now - indeed, at 5000 bars in the window it loads in seconds.

 
5.5 years on the clock is not 5,000 bars, but about 35,000. And not seconds, but even imperceptible fractions of a second.
 
Mendikero:
From the change of scale only RBCI is moving, TTF seems to be stable. I have noticed it at once. It can be easily fixed with the following trick: you have to zoom out on the timeframe, at which you are going to trade, having removed shift of the chart. Then go to the properties of the RBCI indicator and on the first page check the "Fix Minimum" and "Maximum" without changing the numbers in the windows. Now you can change the scale as you like - the entry points will remain in their places. If you change timeframe, you need to remove the ticks, squeeze the chart again, and then put the ticks back in place - to fix the new lows and highs.

So it will turn out that in the stories we have fixed everything as it should be)

and i think it will be like a real time waving with lots of late and false signals

As I noticed, both indicators change scale

 
Mathemat:
5.5 years on the clock is not 5,000 bars, but around 35,000. And not seconds, but even imperceptible fractions of a second.
It doesn't matter, I don't switch the terminal on - I switch it off every five minutes, I can wait, it doesn't bother me.
 
7Konstantin7:

So it will turn out that in the stories we have fixed everything as it should be)

And in the real time I think it will be a kind of waving with a lot of late and false signals

I am not able to check it on the real time because of the weekend, but I will start watching it on Monday with interest.
 

7Konstantin7:

as far as I have noticed both indicators change scale

You can fix both indicators as I wrote above.
 
Mendikero:
Due to the weekend I can't check it out in real life - but will be watching with interest from Monday.
This is true) I have long ago invented such crossovers and also walked the scale, unfortunately there is no use
 
Mathemat:

A couple of dozens of lines can be so messy that the terminal won't load at all.

Yes, I can't call this code optimal. The line with error is highlighted (noticed by Rosh).


Yes!!! Just now I've looked at the code)) The second indicator is obviously not friendly with cycles. And if it had had a drawing start number of 10055 instead of 55...)) - I would have blistered my fingers on the keyboard).
 
Mendikero:
You can fix both indicators as I wrote above.

Yes, you can do that as well.

12345678910...16
New comment