Mt4 End of support. - page 7
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
What if, for the sake of interest, you made a very simple but very feature-rich language. A person could describe a strategy in their own words and make it work. Would it attract more users? Or will they start to lose interest and leave?
Already now OOP allows you to write programs in the "question-answer" style. And you don't need to know what happens in the library to return an answer to your question.
What if, for the sake of interest, you made a very simple but very feature-rich language. A person could describe a strategy in their own words and make it work. Would it attract more users? Or will they start to lose interest and leave?
so there will still be a problem with spelling, you will need to learn how to spell.....
Sincerely.
Why are you walking away from your original statements?
Why is MT5 more complicated than that? It has everything that MT4 has. Aren't you confusing the terms "terminal" and "terminal software"?
It is theuse of SB that simplifies the programming of orders.
Get out of the cage of supermind.
Well, if the question of how MT5 is more complex came from a beginner rather than you, it would be telling.
Structurally, content-wise, it is more complicated. You need to collect the opinion of the general public and understand what the matter is. In my opinion, it is all about gimmicks.
The language is more complicated. A compiler is more demanding.
The language is more complex. The compiler is more demanding.
It doesn't matter for a beginner to study MQL4 or MQL5, he knows neither language.
Sincerely.
like write a story and let the computer trade on it?
so there will still be a problem with spelling, you will need to learn spelling.....
respectfully.
Oleg, don't get angry. Well, it's just that the man doesn't quite know what he's talking about.
At first I too, like you, Artem, thought "not quite", but still, apparently, "quite". ;)
OOP already allows you to write question-and-answer style programs. And you don't need to know what happens in the library to return an answer to your question.
Nah, the question is whether it will increase popularity or frustrate the trade? There's a balance here. You need the complexity to make the goal interesting and enticing. But if there is too much complexity, it is also bad - it kills motivation.
As long as the brokerage house has not turned to mt5, it is not there, and the trader is offered another platform.
As long as the DTs terms of using mt5 are not satisfactory to the trader, the trader will not need it.
As a rule, a trader is not interested in the trading platform, and it doesn't matter whether it has OOP or not.
With respect.
Well, if the question of how MT5 is more complex comes not from you, but from a newcomer, that would be telling.
Structurally, content-wise, it is more complicated. You need to gather the opinion of the general public and understand what it is all about. In my opinion, it is all about gimmicks.
The language is more complicated. The compiler is more demanding.
I.e., if old, unupdated mql4 previously allowed to go beyond the array and receive data outside it, it is better and more convenient to work with money?
Do you consider this and similar to be a delay in development?
Your policy is strange. You seem to position yourself as a developer and a business capitalist, but you consider critical errors in your programs, working with real money, a blessing.
And you consider the fact that the compiler warns you about possible problems while working with the code at the compilation stage to be a complication? On the contrary, it facilitates maintenance and debugging of the program - the compiler immediately points to the possible causes of future bugs. And is it worse? Is it better to get a warning right away or, to please your eye, to get no warnings and then work incorrectly, making you search diligently for hard-to-find errors?
I don't understand your position.
I wonder if you cannot write a question-answer style program without OOP?
Everyone has known for some time that you are a 'standing in a hammock' pioneer.
It's possible, of course. But it's not easier, and it's not faster.
Your position is clear: I will move kilometres of code, but I will write it in a month for my pleasure, than to write it in an evening and stay awake from realizing that everything was too simple.