MetaTrader 4 Client Terminal build 610 - page 14
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
It's only RaptorUK who said that mql4 will be replaced by mql5, he can said what he wants, that does not make it a truth.
Quite right, it is just my opinion I have no inside information.
Neither do I.
In fact I don't understand why you are repeating that regularly (mql4 will become mql5). Let's say this is true one day, so what ?
My point was having consistent languages. I believe it'll be easier for users and programmers alike.
Neither do I.
In fact I don't understand why you are repeating that regularly (mql4 will become mql5). Let's say this is true one day, so what ?
I was simply answering this post . . .
ubzen:
Or make mql5 scripts allow OnInit and OnDeinit. Having 2 inconsistent languages cannot be a good thing in the long-run.
. . . if it's true then there is no issue in the long run. It seems the obvious conclusion to what is happening now . . . IMO.
My point was having consistent languages. I believe it'll be easier for users and programmers alike.
I was simply answering this post . . .
. . . if it's true then there is no issue in the long run. It seems the obvious conclusion to what is happening now . . . IMO.
I see. However, old mql4 with init(), ondeint() and mql5 aren't consistent. People ask for backward compatibility, which is normal, but how to manage this contradiction. If you want consistence between language, you have to broke backward compatibility of 1 of the language.
By the way, I really don't see why mql4 and mql5 have to be consistent (I mean : ok, it's preferable, but it's not mandatory).
I see. However, old mql4 with init(), ondeint() and mql5 aren't consistent. People ask for backward compatibility, which is normal, but how to manage this contradiction. If you want consistence between language, you have to broke backward compatibility of 1 of the language.
By the way, I really don't see why mql4 and mql5 have to be consistent (I mean : ok, it's preferable, but it's not mandatory).
I understand your point and it makes perfect sense.
But then, my question is ... why port so much of mql5_language into mql4?
I see. However, old mql4 with init(), ondeint() and mql5 aren't consistent. People ask for backward compatibility, which is normal, but how to manage this contradiction. If you want consistence between language, you have to broke backward compatibility of 1 of the language.
By the way, I really don't see why mql4 and mql5 have to be consistent (I mean : ok, it's preferable, but it's not mandatory).
I understand your point and it makes perfect sense.
But then, my question is ... why port so much of mql5_language into mql4?
Actually I agree with you People want different things, MQ can't keep everyone happy all the time. Change always upsets people . . . the upset can be mitigated somewhat with good information and documentation.