Older items - page 4
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
That's what I'm saying - if pips and pips (or ticks) are mentioned, then pips are bigger than pips, not the other way round.
That's why I wrote that the author is confused about these concepts.
pss. you seem to be confused as well, since for you these concepts are one and the same.)
As for the forex market, a pip and a pip are the same thing. In the Forex market the pips are the same thing. And there are no old pips and old kilos, no matter what the "fission price" is, even if it is one gram, even if it is 20 grams or an electronic scale.
And in the terminal itself, the fifth digit is shown as a 'tenth of a point'
That's what I'm saying - if pips and pips (or ticks) are mentioned, then pips are bigger than pips, not the other way round.
That's why I wrote that the author of the thread has these concepts mixed up.
they say it's as good as your forehead.
Go to the links above and figure it out, it's not hard.
There is a proverb "as much on the forehead as on the head" - this applies to you.
Go to the links above - it's not hard to figure out.
translate this quote of yours.)
A pip is sometimes confused with the smallest unit of change in a quote
.
;))
translate this quote of yours)
A pip is sometimes confused with the smallest unit of change in a quote
First, it's not my quote -- wikipedia is not an academic publication -- but it can be used as a "jumping off point" to sort out the issue.
Secondly, read the writing yourself:
A pip is sometimes confused with the smallest unit of change in a quote, i.e. thetick size.
-- point, a pip is not equal to or the same as a tick.
A tick is the smallest unit of change in a quote:"Infinancial markets, thetick size is the smallest price increment in which the prices are quoted"(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tick_size).
A point, a pip, is a single change in the most recent published figure.
That is, if the quote is 4-digit, then 1 point = 1 pip = 0.0001 -- if the quote is 5-digit, then 1 point = 1 pip = 0.00001.
All other insinuations (e.g. in the form of 1pip = 10 pips -- or in the form of publishing the 5th digit small, as in the example above -- or interpreting "old" and "new" points) are used no more than to distinguish the significance of quotes when they exist simultaneously -- and to justify the introduction and use of a 5-digit quotation.
Additionally, you can read the interpretations of the MQL documentation:
-- point --Returns the point size of the current instrument in the quote currency(https://www.mql5.com/ru/docs/check/point)
-- digits --Returns the number of decimals after the decimal point, which determines the price precision of the current chart symbol(https://www.mql5.com/ru/docs/check/digits).
I.e., the terminal developers do not introduce any differences in the interpretation of "points" in 4-digit and 5-digit quotes.
Everything is within the well-established and generally accepted definitions, where 1 pip = 1 pip = a single change of the last published digit of the indicator.
Speaking about the question of the topicstarter:
Hi all! A long time ago, when I was just learning mql4 programming, I came across such a concept as old and new points. And in all of the examples from tutorials, a check was added:
if ((digits==5) || (digits==3))
{
dp=deltaPrice*10;
}
Sort of a conversion of old points to new ones in order to make the EA work with any symbol. Well, more than one build has passed since then. I tried to check it in the terminal with different symbols with different decimal places and came to the conclusion that it is not used. Can someone definitely say in what points (old or new) to put in the input parameters of the EA and whether to do the multiplication by 10?
--these checks are used for two purposes:
1) to set the input parameters of advisor in 4-digit quotation - so the advisor can be used on accounts with different quotations without reconfiguration
2) Who is comfortable and who is used to setting the input parameters in points.
The 10-fold multiplication is often used automatically without the user's knowledge - this is fundamentally wrong.
Firstly, it's not my quote -- wikipedia is not an academic publication -- but it can be used as a "point of reference" to deal with the issue.
Secondly, read it yourself:
A pip is sometimes confused with the smallest unit of change in a quote, i.e. thetick size.
-- point, a pip is not equal to or the same as a tick.
how interestingly you translate)
where in the quote is the word point?
We are talking about a pip.
Also reread the sentence of the author of the thread to which I was responding:
That's exactly what I'm interested in, and customers usually ask to specify everything in pips. And about old points he usually forgets, although not once said, and it turns out that he directly specifies the value that he would like to see without any multiplication by 10.
The way I look at it in practice, if it is written in pips, there is no need to multiply anything. Is this statement correct?
the client tells him straight away - I want it in pips - what does "old" "full" or whatever else is there?)
interesting how you translate)
where in the quote is the word point?
It's about pips.
I've given you tons of references and justifications -- and you keep saying the same thing mindlessly and inane.
I will repeat it again, so that you do not confuse others -- and then go on your own:
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and testing trading strategies
Old points
Andrey F. Zelinsky, 2018.07.10 19:35
you can start by opening wikipedia and readinghttps://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Пункт_(economy)
Point(fromLatin.punctum"point"; slangpips fromEng.pip - percentage in point"corresponding percentage") ineconomics is the minimum change in an indicator when no smaller changes are foreseen for this indicator. A single point corresponds to a single change in the most recently published figure for an indicator.
for some reason you refer to orders and customer in your interpretations -- so back on the second page of the discussion you said that it's a good rule of thumb for a developer -- to make it customisable.
So, as for me, I don't care about customer's parameters in 4 or 5 digits -- my EAs are customizable and I never ask them how they want it -- I just do it right.
And of course, you should not use the terminology of the client, who, for the most part, doesn't know the difference between pips, pips and ticks, and second, he doesn't really care.
I've given you tons of references and justifications -- and you're still going on and on, mindlessly and inane.
I'll say it again, so that you don't confuse others -- and then you do it yourself:
you are referring to orders and customers -- on the second page of this discussion, you said that it's good form for a developer to make it customizable.
So, as for me, I do not care about customer's parameters in 4 or 5 digits -- my Expert Advisors are customizable and I never ask for it, I just do it.
And, of course, we should not rely on the terminology of the customer, who, for the most part, firstly, does not see the difference between pips, pips and ticks and, secondly, he doesn't really care.
tell me why a pip is called a pip?
why didn't they call it a pip?
tell me, why did they call a pip a pip?
why didn't they call it a pip?
I'm out of the dialogue, in fact, I've already stated what I wanted to do.
p.s. explained above already:"All other insinuations (e.g. as 1pip = 10 pips -- or as publishing a 5th digit small as in the example above -- or interpreting "old" and "new" points) are used for nothing more than to distinguish the significance of quotes when they exist simultaneously."
why don't you want to go to economic encyclopaedias and dictionaries and figure it out?
here is a scan ofDictionary of Modern Economic Terms, B.A. Raizberg, L.Sh. Lozovsky, 2008.(https://nashol.com/2013121074846/slovar-sovremennih-ekonomicheskih-terminov-raizberg-b-a-lozovskii-l-sh-2008.html)