Function to start a EA - page 3

New comment
 
Alain Verleyen:

Honestly I don't know why you are arguing with me, when your main critic against nicholishen for example was about his style. I am just saying similar things about fxsaber.

Anyway, I am accustomed that people don't care about quality, but I am surprised you don't agree with me about that. If someone want to criticize MQ about their work, it has to be irreproachable on quality, otherwise as the link I posted above demonstrate, it's easy for them to avoid the main point by focusing on "with an overhead, written disgustingly and unreadable".

I didn't mean to argue with anyone ;-). I just found a bit illogical to not recommend the only available solution because of its internal style (and solely on its style) which is out of consideration (as it should be used as a black-box).

There are also reasons why I consider every and each of the men you mentioned in absolutely different way, which is why I find it inappropriate to use one man's words as a proof of other man's skills, and then reference an abstract excerpt about another man's code. (IMHO, details should not be discussed here as offtopic).

I agree with you about fxsaber code, but I don't agree with your backing and resolution.

And as for SL, indeed I've ment many nuances under the "style", not only the formatting.

 
Stanislav Korotky:

I didn't mean to argue with anyone ;-). I just found a bit illogical to not recommend the only available solution because of its internal style (and solely on its style) which is out of consideration (as it should be used as a black-box).

There are also reasons why I consider every and each of the men you mentioned in absolutely different way, which is why I find it inappropriate to use one man's words as a proof of other man's skills, and then reference an abstract excerpt about another man's code. (IMHO, details should not be discussed here as offtopic).

I agree with you about fxsaber code, but I don't agree with your backing and resolution.

And as for SL, indeed I've ment many nuances under the "style", not only the formatting.

Stanislav, it's seems to me a bid misunderstanding.

  • I NEVER talked about style, you did. I am doing a complete distinction about style and quality. As I example, I will talk about one more man's code , namely WHRoeder, his code is of quality without any doubt for me, he is commented, use error checking, etc...however I don't like his style, but I never talk about that as it doesn't matter.
  • I never deny fxsaber skills, that would be absurd. Of course he is skilled and capable, that's why I am arguing about the quality (not the style!) of his code. He is able to do better. And this is what Renat criticized, I still don't see a problem using a quote from him to clarify my point. My error here was it clarified nothing, ok it happens, my bad. Next time I will be more careful.
  • People can use fxsaber as a "black box" if they want, I don't care. But we don't have for habits on this English forum to provide "ready made" solution or "black box" as you said. You are either giving some clues (it's what I did) about the solution or explaining things or providing some partial code. Sometimes we refer about an existing solution in the codebase or we provide it. 
  • I am always (when I see it and I have time) criticizing the quality of answer or code. It's what I did several times with nicholishen or some others, and that's why I mentioned him. I will continue to do it when I feel the need to do it. Doesn't matter if people are not happy and not open minded.

 

oooh dear ...what i have done ..*g*


first of all, thank you for the hints. It is very helpful to complete my idea. I understand the things he is writing, except of a view magic things. But do i have to understand all ?

to join our conversation about style, quality and useablity. thats hard to speak about and to define a standard. in my eyes its always depend on what you want and what kind of reality you are looking for. sure, code should be writen with a codex and should be always easy to understand. but not everyone has the same level/understanding/ablility of abstraction and with this a different type of writing.

ppl with more experience can see things more complex and can think ahead which forms the code there are writing.


About "blackbox", MT5 is a blackbox too ...i dont have to understand how its working in detail at all. it calls "Heisenberg uncertainty principle" ..depends what you looking for you can choose between using it or dive into and understand it.

I could just take a simple EA and modify it until my needings are complete or, i start from scratch and understand how it works and being independed and able to create my own universum :D

LEO.org
  • dict.leo.org
Übersetzung für 'Heisenberg' in LEOs Englisch ⇔ Deutsch Wörterbuch. Mit Flexionstabellen, Aussprache und vielem mehr.
123
New comment
Reason: