How to backtest a manual trading system? - page 3
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
The man is still on his first baby steps. Consider this his "Hello World" EA. He is still trying to wrap his head around the first steps about how to place and close an order. He has not yet reached that stage of development to start checking for previous trades, money management, position sizing, the list goes on and on ...
He still has a long way to go! He just needs a little help to get his first EA to work reasonable so that he will be able to start to walk.
You can't expect him to start coding advanced concepts right from the word go.
Let's be patient and help him with some small stuff. He will soon start walking on his own and coding more advanced stuff.
Right now, all he is concerned about is making a small EA to facilitate his backtest of manual trades for which he already has a table of open and close dates.
Nothing fancy, just some training wheels!
The first step is doing some learning and practise with some pieces of codes in programs you have and understand
Every MT4 has MACD Sample EA and Moving Average EA examples of simple programs to practise with
If you don't understand the logic behind those samples then you fail making own EA's
if i tell to check first the trades of your EA on your account before opening new ones then it is what i call basic stuff
If the OrderSend() isn't called due to a coding error and the ticket number is tested it will be -1, a ticket number of -1 tells us that OrderSend() failed . . . "Returns number of the ticket assigned to the order by the trade server or -1 if it fails." . . . but it didn't fail, it was never called, initialising the ticket number variable to -1 is misleading. Better to initialise it to an invalid value such as -999
I see your point and concede but only partly. For my own code, I still feel my way works best for me. I guess our coding styles are different and probably will never know which way is best.
However, in the spirit of openness, I am going to dedicate some thought to it to make sure I am not just dismissing it due to my own preconceived notion of things.
The first step is doing some learning and practise with some pieces of codes in programs you have and understand
Every MT4 has MACD Sample EA and Moving Average EA examples of simple programs to practise with
If you don't understand the logic behind those samples then you fail making own EA's
if i tell to check first the trades of your EA on your account before opening new ones then it is what i call basic stuff
Not everyone learns in the same way nor does everyone follow the same steps in learning to code. As you are well aware, some people start reading a book by first reading the last pages or flips it from back to start. It may not be "logical" but it is how different our mental processes are.
After a while, the OP may decide that you are right and that he should follow a different process, but for now, in his mind he is following the right path, even if we disagree with it.
Telling him he is wrong does not help if he does not understand yet why he is wrong. He will find his own way, if we offer some small corrections and some encouragement.
He will soon find those pitfalls for himself and recognise your wisdom, but only later on his own terms, when he can grasp those concepts.
I see your point and concede but only partly. For my own code, I still feel my way works best for me. I guess our coding styles are different and probably will never know which way is best.
However, in the spirit of openness, I am going to dedicate some thought to it to make sure I am not just dismissing it due to my own preconceived notion of things.
You were NOT told that, please don't misrepresent what I wrote . . . you were also not called a "liar" . . . that word does not appear in this thread until your post above.
Actually, "WHRoeder" did call him a "liar" and I quote « "scolding him" because he LIED » and it did appear in the thread before he decided to "leave".
Maybe the man has a sensitive nature and felt he was unwanted.
No problem! He thanked us for our efforts!
Actually, "WHRoeder" did call him a "liar" and I quote « "scolding him" because he LIED » and it did appear in the thread before he decided to "leave".
Maybe the man has a sensitive nature and felt he was unwanted.
No problem! He thanked us for our efforts!