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
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.
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.
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