Bug found with input group and iCustom() - page 2

New comment
 

Follow-up ...

Apparently this has been discussed before ...

So, it seems it will not change—neither fixed nor the documentation updated.
 

A post from another user who disagrees that this should be called a bug ...

Forum on trading, automated trading systems and testing trading strategies

Errors, bugs, questions

Aleksandr Slavskii , 2024.01.24 17:44

Why do you think this is a mistake?

This has been the case for a long time.

If you run the script from the help for IndicatorParameters , it immediately shows that input   group is a full-fledged indicator parameter that must be passed to the function input parameters   iCustom() 


Short name Round_Levels, type IND_CUSTOM
parameter 0 : type= TYPE_STRING , long_value= 0 , double_value= 0 ,string_value=Indicators\Круглые уровни\Round_Levels.ex5
parameter 1 : type= TYPE_INT , long_value= 5 , double_value= 0 ,string_value=(null)
parameter 2 : type= TYPE_INT , long_value= 0 , double_value= 0 ,string_value=(null)
parameter 3 : type= TYPE_BOOL , long_value= 1 , double_value= 0 ,string_value=(null)
parameter 4 : type= TYPE_UINT , long_value= 12180223 , double_value= 0 ,string_value=(null)

и так далее...


 
It would do you a lot of good to study the subtle difference between mt5 and mt4 "iCustom()" calls, it's not a bug, like I alluded to in your first post.
 
Thank-god Avwerosuoghene Odukudu #: It would do you a lot of good to study the subtle difference between mt5 and mt4 "iCustom()" calls, it's not a bug, like I alluded to in your first post.

Differences between MQL4 and MQL5 have nothing to do with the issue.

What is in question, is how the "input groups" should be considered, given the lack of documentation or any explanation on the implementation.

I personally do consider it a bug, or an incorrect implementation, or in the very least, an "oversight".

However, given its existence for so long, I doubt it will ever be reconsidered or the documentation changed.

 
Fernando Carreiro #:

Differences between MQL4 and MQL5 have nothing to do with the issue.

What is in question, is how the "input groups" should be considered, given the lack of documentation or any explanation on the implementation.

I personally do consider it a bug, or an incorrect implementation, or in the very least, an "oversight".

However, given its existence for so long, I doubt it will ever be reconsidered or the documentation changed.

It has a significant effect on your output, and this is not about creating handle or direct access. In his case, it should be called with a string(empty or not), and all is well.

There are still other nuances, he/she would discover when the need arises.


Cheers, to the great moderator. You deserve you praises. Well done.

 
Thank-god Avwerosuoghene Odukudu #: It has a significant effect on your output, and this is not about creating handle or direct access. In his case, it should be called with a string(empty or not), and all is well. There are still other nuances, he/she would discover when the need arises.

Your answer makes no sense!

 
Hello posters of this thread. If you have found an inconsistency in the documentation, please note it in the thread.... Just to keep everything in one spot.

 
@Dominik Egert #: Hello posters of this thread. If you have found an inconsistency in the documentation, please note it in the thread.... Just to keep everything in one spot. https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/445076

Yes, it can be considered an inconsistency in the documentation, if MetaQuotes is unwilling to consider it a poor implementation.

However, explaining it in the documentation is not going to be that simple (I think) and may require at least a full paragraph to clearly explain it.

 
Fernando Carreiro #:

Yes, it can be considered an inconsistency in the documentation, if MetaQuotes is unwilling to consider it a poor implementation.

However, explaining it in the documentation is not going to be that simple (I think) and may require at least a full paragraph to clearly explain it.

Do you think this is sufficient??

https://www.mql5.com/en/forum/445076/page4#comment_51898501
 

Was the group keyword removed? 


It is not highlighted nor compiled. Build 4410.

123
New comment