Discussion of article "MQL for "Dummies": How to Design and Construct Object Classes" - page 4

New comment
 
I read the word "teapot" in the title of the article. I think they finally remembered about me, so I'll understand something. Yeah, you will. And this is despite the fact that half a year ago I've read Kovalev's textbook on MKL4 - though not to the end. Guys you would before writing the word dummies. would immediately specify that by dummies you probably mean, to put it mildly, not dummies. Or then give us your definition of dummies or something!?
 
Tincup:
I read the word "teapot" in the title of the article. I think they finally remembered about me, so I'll understand something. Yeah, you will. And this is despite the fact that half a year ago I've read Kovalev's textbook on MKL4 - though not to the end. Guys you would before writing the word dummies. immediately would specify that by dummies you probably mean, to put it mildly, not dummies. Or what's your definition of dummies?!?

Yeah, I thought the same thing. I was very disappointed, but in general, I read it and figured out the toy is cool, I learnt some things.

but I had to find out a lot of things from my friends who know oopeshniks, and there are such people.

but for example it's very difficult to understand polymorphism and inheritance.

if encapsulation is still ok...

but the rest of it is a reference to wikipedia.

 

the article is not for dummies after all...

I'm waiting for the parabolic. Man seems to be writing normally.

as they say with salt.

and without unnecessary trips to wikipedia.

But again, we'll read it and find out.

 
Tincup:
I read the word "teapot" in the title of the article. I think they finally remembered about me, so I'll understand something. Yeah, right.

What don't you understand? Where are the questions? I'll be happy to answer them.

===

As long as there is no dialogue, it is difficult to assume what is not clear to the "dummy".

 

 It can't be compiled.

 

'w_corner' - can't convert enum ClassWin.mqh 114 20

 
bcsunwww :

 It can't be compiled.

'w_corner' - can't convert enum ClassWin.mqh 114 20

use explicit typecasting:

replace

Property.Corner= w_corner;

with

Property.Corner=(ENUM_BASE_CORNER) w_corner;
Source codes of the articles corrected. Thank you.
 

Question from an OOP dummy!!!!

I mastered MQL4 only for writing Expert Advisors (I never learnt to write indicators). A successful Expert Advisor was finally written.

How can OOP help me in writing Expert Advisors, except for decorating charts with buttons and other graphical objects?

 
dimeon:

Question from an OOP dummy!!!

How can OOP help me in writing Expert Advisors, except for decorating charts with buttons and other graphical objects?

For example, like this: your trading strategy is a class, and inside the class there are methods - MM, calculation of SL and TP levels, filters, etc. Having created a basic class of your strategy, you can then use it in different Expert Advisors, changing only one or two methods, and the rest will be inherited.
 
dimeon:

Question from an OOP dummy!!!!

I mastered MQL4 only for writing Expert Advisors (I never learnt to write indicators). A successful Expert Advisor was finally written.

How can OOP help me in writing Expert Advisors, except for decorating charts with buttons and other graphical objects?


the question is akin to "why do I need a tractor when I can dig up my 2 square metres of vegetable garden with a shovel", and if it is not 2 square metres but 20 hectares?

first study the possibilities of OOP, and then decide whether it will help you or not.

in principle, if the project is not big and you do it alone, you can do without any OOP, but if several people work together, even for small projects OOP gives an advantage.

 
DC2008:
For example, like this: your trading strategy is a class, and inside the class are methods - MM, calculation of SL and TP levels, filters, etc. Having created a basic class of your strategy, you can then use it in different Expert Advisors, changing only one or two methods, and the rest will be inherited.

Still, I don't see any advantages of using OOP. Maybe it prevents me from understanding what kind of beasts such "classes" are.

What you have said can be formalised as separate functions. Or not all of them? I'm not being picky, please understand me correctly - I'm trying to understand the principles of OOP.

I would like to see on concrete simple examples the difference in the speed of work of appropriately formatted codes (with and without OOP), and the advantages of OOP in terms of simplicity of project organisation.

123456
New comment