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
It's a mess, frankly.
In 1985, I was introduced to the programmable calculator (thanks to Tehnika-Young magazine). If before that - I was strictly focused on radio electronics, from that moment - I started to move more and more to programming. At first - in calculator commands... Then there was the I8080 assembler and BASIC on the EC-1010 at the institute... Then x86 assembler and then C++ as MSVC.
What a mess. And these people talk about simplicity. You can't even put yourself in a beginner's shoes with all that experience.
What a mess. And these people talk about simplicity. You cannot even put yourself in a beginner's shoes with all this experience.
Here - I agree. However, one must take into account that it is programmers who gather on this forum, though they don't know anything about physics, but they are very strong "coders". This is their hangout, figuratively speaking. Actually, I have already understood it, that I got a little wrong - but, nevertheless, it is interesting to read.
And just dull-witted people, who have no skills neither in programming, nor in modeling, have to wait for the voice control of orders and lying on a sofa, to announce the room and the computer with incredible in thought trade orders.
There is an SB for simplicity. And even a reference to all its methods. But it's easier to whine, right?
Like a parrot, just plain simple.
Yes, I get a jar of jam and a basket of biscuits every week from the methaquotes. )))) Now I see why some PLOs don't fit in their heads - a brain the size of a pea, but a soul full of anger at the whole world.
Here - I agree. However, we must take into account that this forum is a gathering of programmers, who, although not really know anything about physics, are very strong "coders". This is their hangout, figuratively speaking. Actually, I already understood it, that I got a little wrong - but it's still interesting to read.
What I've seen is nothing more than generating a template for later refinement
have you seen real diamonds from this class? to generate and not be ashamed to go straight to market ))
For simplicity, there is an SB. And there's even a reference on all its methods. But it's easier to whine, right?
Artyom -- that's a good point:
Keep in mind that MT is an application terminal, which solves applied problems, and I don't think the proportion of users who have programming skills is large.
Take Excel for example - it has cells and a simple table could be programmed without any programming skills - for more advanced and more complex tasks there is VBA.
I have several customers who made small changes in mql4 without any problem - I finish writing the complicated logic for them, and then they "twist" it - but mql5 is too complicated for them, that's all - this is what we are talking about.
Yes, there is freelancing - but there is not enough money for minor changes - and time is the key factor - it's one thing to change the "plus" to "minus" - and another thing to formulate the TOR and wait until they do it.
For whose simplicity, yours. I'm curious, how do you define that? That the SAT is so simple and understandable to a beginner, that there is nothing more simple than the help and articles to it.
SB is not a textbook example. SB is for problem solving. It has a threshold of entry. Imho, it is not very high, but it is there. Although, again, I agree that SB could have been easier and better written, but it is not, because SB was written by average programmers.