Any rookie question, so as not to clutter up the forum. Professionals, don't pass by. Nowhere without you - 6. - page 658
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
Please advise where to look...... maybe more loops instead of booklets with if() or maybe it would help if most of the code during testing was made as part of the comments /*.........*/
We can't tell anything without the code.
You can't say anything without the code.
I understand, thank you.
A simple question for programmers
Can I write an EA based on an indicator with ex4 extension? The indicator draws the target and stop in the form of pixels on the chart itself.
A couple more similar questions ) If it is possible, is it possible to test such an EA without visualization?
Advise a programmer who would do this for a reasonable fee, if it is possible of course...
It depends on the indicator. You probably can.
I understand, thank you.
If you want to optimise the code, please contact
A simple question for programmers
Can I write an EA based on an indicator with ex4 extension? The indicator draws the target and stop in the form of pixels on the chart itself.
A couple more similar questions ) If it is possible, is it possible to test such an EA without visualization?
Advise a programmer who would do this for a reasonable fee, if it is possible of course...
This does not seem to work in this case. The indicator builds objects and they are not available in test mode
The OrdersTotal() tester gives zero value in indicators (everything works in EAs during the same test). Has it always been like this or is this a new build? And this operation is normal?
The function produces normal data in normal mode: demo or real. What is the trick that it does not work in the tester?
The code is trivial to trivial:
Am I asking something stupid that there is no answer? If anything, don't blame me for asking "stupid" questions: I'm not a professional.
And about "has it always been like this?" - I have not made such indicators using OrdersTotal() on old builds, so I don't know how it was. Perhaps, it is due to some necessity that does not work in inidicators on the tester. Or is it a bug in newer builds? That's all I want to understand.
Thanks in advance for the answers.
The OrdersTotal() tester gives zero value in indicators (everything works in EAs during the same test). Has it always been like this or is this a new build? And this operation is normal?
The function produces normal data in normal mode: demo or real. What is the trick that it does not work in the tester?
The code is trivial to trivial:
Are you too lazy to look in the documentation to find your ill-fated OrdersTotal(). How did it appear in the indicator? That's a question to the author of the indicator! Maybe it's an Expert Advisor, not an indicator! Seriously study the language, and then ask questions!
It seems that in this case it will not be possible. The indicator builds objects and they are not available in test mode
Thank you... I was thinking along the same lines.
No way to test in visualisation mode either?
Maybe tell me how would it be possible to test such an owl? Or haven't encountered one?
Are you too lazy to look in the documentation to find your ill-fated OrdersTotal(). How did it appear in the indicator? That's a question to the author of the indicator! Maybe it's an Expert Advisor, not an indicator! You should seriously study the language, and then ask questions!
Cool! : )))))
Boris, thank you for your reply. You have a large number of posts and as I recall you have always been distinguished by your literacy in answering and helping.
Let's be more specific, though.
1. Before asking this question, I had been dealing with it for months. Of course I had studied it over and over again, because I had access to it on my own.
2. I have not asked this question on a forum for a long time, though I tried to ask it a couple of times and then deleted it, because I expected exactly the same reaction. But now I was morally ready to take that "hit". Therefore I'm not offended.
3. Where in the documentation did you see the answer to my question? I am very curious to know! Don't you know that MetaQuotes has one of the worst support for documented features? I'm already exhausted from discussing this in previous posts. Otherwise these questions wouldn't have arisen. Compare the western counterparts and our domestic ones. Please do not compare them to "poo". Like - and we are cooler than that shit over there. (I apologize for emotionalism of this paragraph, but I do not know how to phrase it more delicately in order to keep the poignancy of controversy.)
I am, of course, happy and very grateful for the answers. But I would like to hear the answers, rather than the retort and empty rhetoric about "What assholes everyone is, that they ask such stupid questions, unworthy of our, professionals', attention".
I sincerely hope my 8 educations don't crush the ego of professionals too much. Sometimes think that the people asking the questions might not be any stupider. It's just that the more qualified ones could use some help in these matters.
I hope I have not offended you too much. And anyway, thank you very much, Boris. You answered at least somehow. By the way. somehow the MetaQuotes are making a terminal too... To which this conflict is a proof. My conflict is in solving the problem by means of the MKL language.
4. I am the author of the indicator. I am the one who writes the indicator, that's why I am interested in this issue.
And why shouldn't this function be in an indicator? It's not making deals that are excluded in indicators. Everything works fine in demo and real modes. It only does not work in the tester. (I highlight and underline all on purpose)
It appears in the indicator to relieve the work of the Expert Advisor. It's very well described in the "Program Sharing" section of the MCL 4 tutorial, which, of course, I re-read every time when I get in trouble, before I ask my "stupid" questions on this esteemed forum. : ))) A bit of irony to lighten the load, I guess, doesn't hurt.