My approach. The core is the engine. - page 71
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
I keep forgetting to ask@Peter Konow if your development works in the strategy tester?
On Sharp, the window works fine in the tester, nothing slows down because the window runs in a separate thread
I'm working on a solution right now. Here is the concept:
Don't forget, there is a visualization and optimization mode. In the second case, everything should work faster than just fast...
Yes, I think so. I will take it into account. In optimization mode, the user simply will not press the "connect to EA in tester" button on the engine.
Therefore, the engine will not search for Expert Advisor in the tester and will not connect.
Yes, it works with tables. Everything is fast enough (the human eye does not notice any lags). But, there are no dynamic tables yet. Will do.
I am currently working on a solution. The concept is as follows:
And this is the kind of communication that non-programmer users of your engine are offered to establish?
Is this the kind of communication that non-programmer users of your engine are asked to make?
No. This connection will be implemented by me.
Users simply throw the EA in the tester and click the"connect with the EA in the tester" button in the engine on the source chart.
The users do not need to do anything else. The connection will work.
And this is the kind of communication that non-programmer users of your engine are asked to establish?
I remember the army and the brigade commander who used to end his speech with the phrase: Except for the sexual connection, there is no connection at all.
.... imho, even on the subject, users without support, and with support, it is unlikely, in runent, well not to lie, about 80% of users can not even test something in the tester correctly, they see only a balance chart ..., the remaining 20 = 10% confident users, but in principle do not open the MetaEditor, the remaining 10%, yes this potential
imho, only Market can put everything in its place:
- Either Peter sells his own creations
- Or he publishes the source code and the manual and Market sellers will use his creation (during the last holiday some schoolchildren wanted to sell their Expert Advisor generated by Master MQL5 in the Market, but something went wrong )))))
Why look for an expert in any particular way? In MT4 you can put the indicator on the visual testing chart.
But in MT5, dry your oars, you can search there or not.
Why look for an expert in any particular way? In MT4 you can put the indicator on the visual testing chart.
But in MT5, you need to dry your oars.
The interaction of the engine and the Expert Advisor in the tester.
The events of the engine (pressing, moving the slider) will go to the EA under test and all data of the tables and elements will go to the engine.
In short, we want to be able to control the EA during visual testing. And to see all of the output data.
.... imho, even to the point, the users without support, and with support, unlikely, in runent, well not to lie, about 80% of users are not even able to test something in the tester correctly, see only the balance chart ..., the remaining 20 = 10% confident users, but in principle do not open MetaEditor, the remaining 10%, yes this potential
That's right, I've been saying that for a long time.
The idea itself - quite sensible, if there was a target audience - that is, people who know programming, but prefer to trade mostly "hands on". For these people - yes, they may want to make beautiful buttons, handy controls, reports directly on the chart...
But how many people like that?
And the fact that Peter does not recognize OOP, and loves global access to everything he can reach with his hands - so with his memory it is not surprising. And if the target audience has people with the same memory - the Peters approach - will be very convenient for them.
Peter, however, claims that he "sort of educates the right people".
Well, well...
I'm even ready to agree with that, if Peter (or someone else) shows " semi-automatic trading class". But I have my doubts. And without it - no chance of "bringing up the right people".
That's right, I've been saying that for a long time.
The idea itself is quite sensible, if there were a target audience - that is, people who know programming, but prefer to trade mainly "by hand". For these people - yes, they may want to make beautiful buttons, handy controls, reports directly on the chart...
But how many people like that?
And the fact that Peter does not recognize OOP, and loves global access to everything he can reach with his hands - so with his memory it is not surprising. And if the target audience has people with the same memory - they will find Peter's approach very convenient.
Peter, however, claims that he "sort of educates the right people".
Well, well...
I'm even ready to agree with it, if Peter (or someone else) shows the " semi-automatic trading class". But I have my doubts. And without it - no chance of "bringing up the right people".
George, I don't get it - what does my approach have to do with it? I'm providing a GUI connection interface, which is created with a lightweight markup language. Who and why would want to learn my approach?
Everything I suggest is much simpler than the simplest MQL.