Ambitious ideas !!! - page 2
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
Actually, OOP is a way to reduce program code and spend most of your time debugging program logic, not data representation.
What does program logic have to do with data representation? These things are not related in any way.
Program logic is arithmetic operations on any input data, while data representation is just data in one format or another.
And by definition it is impossible to reduce program code with OOP since there appear external pointers to objects for addressing the internal data (functions and variables) instead of direct addressing. But since calculation of pointers and memory reference is a very slow operation, performance slows down accordingly.
...
3. I am a hardcore locker and all my strategies are based on this pointless and harmful feature of MT4. However, I am firmly convinced that the market shown in MT4 is not the same as in MT5, they are fundamentally different markets, on one of which you can make money (MT4) and on the other you cannot (MT5).
...
4. I don't like or even hate OOP. I don't know it and I really don't understand why people choose OOP, while there is a very simple and unbelievably ugly MQL4. It's so simple and lame that it's incredibly easy to write "Hello forex!" type programs in it, which automatically means that it's a cakewalk to write multi-currency/multi-timeframe/multisystem EAs.
It's all beauty in simplicity.
...
5. Despite years of experience I still don't get it...
I wouldn't write such statements so as not to look in a bad light.
Generally from your post, it seems to me that you have a complaint in my direction. Please send me a message with a detailed explanation of it and let's discuss it.
In MT5 we were deprived of a lot of things, deprivation is fundamental in nature. In MT5 we were blindsided by the functionality. You can use buttons and pictures to show charts, it's an open door for our imagination. In forex, any forex software has to be mathematical and it has to be able to analyse and calculate. MT4 and MT5 are the same in terms of calculation, because the mathematical operations are the same. The trading possibilities are different, but personally I am happy with MT4, both in terms of programming language and trading.
I'm trying to solve problems not because I don't know mql5, but because I love MQL4, you can consider it as the last tribute to MQL4.
I'm trying to solve problems in mql4 not because I don't know mql5, but because I love MQL4, and I think it's the last MQL4 tribute, because no solution in this programming language with avoiding all the pitfalls and limitations of 4 has yet been found. I want to put a full stop and loudly say - if 4 can do it, why pay more for 5?
For a couple of years now I have been periodically plagued by the idea of implementing a multi-currency strategy tester.
In fact, I am interested in any thoughts from you forum members on this idea. Perhaps in this thread will be collected materials that will be used in the development, that is, what you advise.
That may come in handy.
This scribble can be used as a library of virtual transactions, including multicurrency. was created as part of a project that never earned, the comments are rich, you can figure out in codebase is not posted because of unfinished . See a pale ghost of hope knock in person, I can participate .
That might come in handy.
We'll look into it, thank you.
I'll let you know what I find out, a clear head can't hurt in a case like this.
OOP is just a petty Moscow publicity stunt to write more code scattered all over the place and load the processor more at the same time. :)
It drives up the price of software and hardware resources, with almost the same final performance. But of course they are not fools and do not write their programs on OOP. :)
Are you OK with your head (the place you put your food in)?
go on, go on, I think this is the opinion of a pro (that's you) about structured programming.
I'll add a little, so that you understand what simplicity is for a programmer when he uses OOP:
- I used to write programs on turbo-pascal, everything was fine, but I really wanted to have normal interface - I started to do as you suggest - I wrote a lot of clever procedures, then a window to draw in which the input data to enter, then a couple of windows to output the results, and then to output a graphical model, and text boxes to save, but then it turned out that the mouse should move the windows, And when I saw that the monster that I was creating now consisted of 80% of code for the interface, and the remaining 20% was the calculations themselves, and the interface was barely reaching Norton Commander's size, I got interested in Turbo Vision, which is a shining example of OOP, And since then, God forbid, if I get a project with which I've been working for more than 3 weeks and am going to work with it further, and if the programming language allows me to write OOP, I always rewrite the code for OOP - sorry, but it wasn't my idea: "time is money" - OOP in a serious project saves time
OOP is needed for complex projects, which no programmer works on. It is very difficult to understand someone else's code (and even your own code if it has been a while), while in OOP everything is unified and transparent. Applying OOP to small tasks is inefficient.
Applying OOP to small tasks is inefficient.
OOP is probably inferior to FP in efficiency (not speed) in a hundred percent of projects.
OOP is just a petty PR trick of writing more code scattered in various places and loading the processor more at the same time. :)
This drives up the price of software and hardware resources, with almost the same final performance. But of course they are not fools and do not write their programs on OOP. :)
_____________________________________
OOP rules and probably enough on this subject. The topic is different.
OOP is inferior to FP in terms of efficiency (not speed) in probably a hundred per cent of projects.
From experience :) not just mine. Maybe a little bit of a lie, but pure FP is a thing of the past.