Errors, bugs, questions - page 24

 
Interesting:
In MQL4, this function was implemented using WinAPI, which required WinUser32.mqh file, now it is not needed (at least, it's not required explicitly).
Thank you, I will try to test it now.
 
And that's right, it works without it.
 

At least 5 builds already, including 291

 

build 291

MetaTester: Fixed closing of positions at the end of testing.

Positions are now closed one hour earlier.

I can quote an Expert Advisor if needed.

 
joo:

At least the last 5 builds, including 291

What does "Balance Max" optimisation (testing) show? So far you have "Balance+ Min Drawdown" selected and the results are accordingly.

 
Yedelkin:

What does "Balance Max" optimisation (testing) show? So far you have "Balance+ Min Drawdown" selected, and the results are appropriate.

What does "appropriate results" have to do with it?

The initial deposit is a four-digit number, while the optimization results, for some reason, are in six digits. This is a bug.

 
joo:

What does this have to do with "matching results"?

The initial deposit is a four-digit number, but the optimisation results are six-digit numbers for some reason. This is a bug.

Look at the results obtained using different values of the optimization parameters, including the "Balance+ Min Drawdown" parameter. And how they differ from each other.

So the question remains: what does the optimization (testing) by "Balance Max"parameter show ?

And as for the six-digit numbers, I have nine-digit numbers even with the initial parameter "Balance Max" https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/1227:). And when selecting the parameter "Balance + Min Drawdown" will be a total crap :) )). But I'm waiting for a build update .

 
Yedelkin:
....

Please don't bother commenting on my posts. My bug report is addressed to developers and I copied it here and not in Service Desk because I had to show screenshots.

Yedelkin:
So the question remains: What does the "Balance Max" optimisation (testing) show ?

I will not be bothered by it.

 
joo:
Please don't bother commenting on my posts. My error message is addressed to developers, I posted it here and not in servicedesk, because I had to show screenshots.
It's not hard for me to show the obvious, and your posts have nothing to do with it. If you read the help you could find the answer yourself, without further reference to the developers.
 
Yedelkin:
It's not difficult for me to state the obvious. If you read the help you could have found the answer yourself without referring to the developers.

Where in the help it says: "The size of the balance in each optimisation run is 100 times larger than it actually is. But do not pay attention to this, it's just a harmless glitch"?

Show me, point me.

Reason: