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 exactly is the problem?
Shit, is the problem solved correctly, or are there nuances. It's not just time that rules the ball.
I don't know how to answer you in Chinese.
Shit, is the problem solved correctly, or are there nuances. It's not just time that rules the ball.
You'd better take care of your grandchildren...
Thank you for your answer, not you.
Thank you for your answer, not you.
Of course, there are a lot of nuances. There is no point in solving this problem thoroughly and thoroughly, because it is a purely academic problem and there is no practical application yet.
This is a "no-brainer" task. It is the kind of task that makes sense to tackle thoroughly and thoroughly.
This is a "no-brainer" task It is the kind of task that makes sense to tackle thoroughly and thoroughly.
changed the calculation of the amount to CRC32 )
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and trading strategy testing
Clearing an array of given element(s)
nicholi shen, 2018.11.17 03:58
I would usea HashSetdata structure for value values.
The complexity would be: O(n) + O(m)
For the proposed binary search, the complexity would be: O(n log(m))
1. What library do you use for hash sets?
2.The ones I have seen for MQL are slower than binary search ...
1. I haven't used any library for HashSet.
It's just a theoretical approach to solving the problem.
2.MQL had many questions concerning the implementation. But their task is universality, not maximum speed for primitive types.
Depending on the input parameters of the problem, the values of constants for complexity of algorithms will change.
As a consequence, a slower algorithm in terms of complexity under certain input conditions can produce faster speeds than a faster algorithm in terms of complexity.
The problem with an array of deleted values proved to be more interesting. There is still a lot of room for creativity here.
I have come up with the following option.
But the implementation is just a blink of an eye...
Instead of calling function ("FindValueInSortArray") with 100-500 unnecessary parameters, usually a class is used where these parameters act as fields of the class (gain on passing of parameters, if compiler hasn't thought to make implicit inline).
If there is a need to use a pair of arrays of the same size and with one purpose of use ( int p1[]; int p2[];), usually a structure array is used (index access advantage, less chance of cache miss).