Tester supporting MG4 scripts and advisors - page 6
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
Not so long ago one of the developers in a rush of denunciation stated about MT5 and CopyXXX functions:
нетривиальное решение по обращению к другим тф. работа с разными таймфремами очень сильно напрягает
So right - these are all excuses.
In the sentence"In this way,C++ is no different from JavaScript either. "The phrase"In this way" defines (or clarifies) the criterion of comparison. This raises the odd question - "What are you arguing about here?"
As far as I understand, brokerage companies have to pay for the use of mt5, so you put them in a situation where there is no point in paying "extra" money if everybody is already sitting fine on mt4. No demand for mt5 among traders, no reason for brokerage companies to spend, while the demand will not be present until they launch mt5 servers, it's a vicious circle, maybe they should reduce the appetite, or even give them mt5 free for a certain period of time so that they would finally gain popularity in forex
This is my speculation and thoughts on mt5)
MQL5 documentation is 4000 pages long in 9 languages, there is a huge kodobase in sources, 360 articles translated into 5 languages, forums in 5 languages, where you can ask questions and so on.
Why do people admit that to realize their task on MT4 it takes them a day, and to do the same thing on MT5 it takes them a week?
It may be the case that there is a lot of documentation, but not that which is required to achieve a particular result. Considering the complexity of the model, according to which MT5 works, it is no longer possible to intuitively guess in unclear places.
The existing documentation contains only manuals with very short descriptions. This kind of material is only good for those who are completely familiar with the architecture of program and data representation models of MT5, and only forgot some details in a certain place. At the same time, the documentation doesn't describe all cases, in particular the erroneous ones are often not described. In particular, can't AccountInfoDouble() return 0?
This case is not described in the documentation. And then people have division by 0.
Articles on important issues together do not make a coherent whole, and the articles themselves are often rambling and raise even more questions than they give answers. The same article on a step-by-step Guide to writing MQL5 Expert Advisors for beginners attempts to grasp the immensity: it even explains the basics of the language, such as data types and preprocessor directives.
What the documentation is now is called reference. And the documentation should contain a guide instead of articles describing how to create an EA that would analyze tasks that need to be solved in order to create an EA and give examples of their correct solution, not in a bunch of long code, but in pieces. And for all the subtle and special questions, an article format would be good enough.
And there must be a sufficiently detailed description of the system architecture for a person to have a good idea of both data representation model and a program model of working with data.
In other words, it comes out that, although there is a lot of documentation quantitatively, there is none that is required to achieve a specific result.
Someone was asked:
- Why is it that if, say, aliens exist, they don't talk to us, don't teach us?
He was told:
- Would you teach cockroaches to talk? Why don't you do that?
Are you sure the person you asked is the right answer?
Don't you suppose the reason for not communicating is something else?
If Integer meant the data representation model and the programming model, why is he talking about the difference between languages and not between them and then openly says that in fact all languages are the same?
So why do people admit that in one case it takes a day to realise their task on MT4 and in the same case it takes a week to realise the same task on MT5?
Most likely they don't admit it, but pretend in public for the sake of supporting a false opinion.
This is programming, so you can't complain here. It has never been easy, even when laid out on a silver platter. I have been writing software for 25 years, and it is always the same: regardless of the technology, you have to work.
Most likely they don't admit it, but pretend in public for the sake of supporting a false opinion.
This is programming, so you can't complain here. It has never been easy, even when laid out on a silver platter. I have been writing software for 25 years , and it is always the same: regardless of the technology, you have to work.
Those are truly golden words. I can't manage to use some functions, even my own, now I have to remove something superfluous, and then return it again and add something else...
I don't agree with Renat on everything, though.
Most likely they won't admit it, but rather pretend for the public for the sake of supporting a false opinion.
This is programming, so you can't complain here. It has never been easy, even when laid out on a silver platter. I have been writing software for 25 years, and it is always the same: regardless of the technology, you have to work.
However, this very programming can be made either simpler or more complicated. If sooner option "more difficult" was chosen - all the more we need appropriate documentation so that people could first understand the structure of the model which they are going to program. And there should be a lot of examples of exemplary competent code showing how different aspects, and in general this model would be programmed by a professional. So it should not be left to outsiders who are not professionals, it should be handled by people on the development team. Who, if not them, should know how to use the created model correctly, competently and efficiently?
But here, apart from this problem, there are two more insurmountable ones. Poor quality of model/language implementation and evolutionary voluntarism. During the evolution of the platform you can not count on anything: at any time the model can be changed without preserving compatibility, and there is no telling when this may happen, and in the process of MT4 evolution there are attempts to mislead the user with pseudographic files that are in fact zip-archives (mt4clw.png). The problems of low quality and voluntarism have been repeatedly argued by people here without me.
Even Microsoft, which once walked the line, does not allow itself such voluntarism towards users.
There are other limitations in MT5 specifically, such as those related to quotes, which the user who has "moved" to MT5 will have to reckon with.
But the long-running confrontation between MetaQuotes, which wants to drag users to MT5, and users who do not want to "move" there, continues. MetaQuotes has launched another offensive with an explosive evolution of MT4 towards MT5 to shake the users' resolve to stay on MT4. What will come of this will be seen.
But in any case, the existing scattered documentation for the MT5 is an obstacle both to "move" and to be mastered from scratch by very new users.
However, this very programming could be made simpler or more complicated. Once the "more complex" option has been chosen, all the more so that adequate documentation is required, so that people can first understand the structure of the model they will be programming. And there should be a lot of examples of exemplary competent code showing how different aspects, and in general this model would be programmed by a professional. So it should not be left to outsiders who are not professionals, it should be handled by people on the development team. Who, if not them, should know how to use the created model correctly, competently and efficiently?
Don't try to pretend that documentation or examples are missing or few. There are so many examples on this site that you won't find them anywhere else.
But here, apart from this problem, there are two more insurmountable ones. Poor quality of model/language implementation and evolutionary voluntarism. During the evolution of the platform you can not count on anything: at any time the model can be changed without preserving compatibility, and there is no telling when this may happen, and in the process of MT4 evolution there are attempts to mislead the user with pseudographic files that are in fact zip-archives (mt4clw.png). The problems of poor quality and voluntarism have been repeatedly berated here without me.
You're making a big accusation.
MT4 was released over 9 years ago and would have lost a lot without the latest upgrade. We have kept good compatibility and still drag and drop a second copy of the virtual machine for the old MQL4 code.
On updates: it's up to us how to pass system update files so they don't get blocked by firewalls. If you think you are so smart, then try to transfer .exe files to millions of computers and see how many of them will be removed by antivirus and firewalls without any chance.
Even Microsoft, which once walked the line, does not allow itself such voluntarism towards users.
Pure lies.
Stop repeating nonsense and outright lies. Behind the urge to argue, don't lose your shores, please.
Let's get closer to reality:
And this is what simpleton opposes. Too bad he has no idea what he is criticising.