Errors, bugs, questions - page 2035

[A100]

fxsaber:

Why shouldn't a macro cause an error at this point?

Because the entries

#define  MACRO( X, Y )   X/**/##/**/ Y
#define  MACRO( X, Y )   X    ##     Y

is equivalent to the entry

#define  MACRO( X, Y )       X##Y

To me, it's from the "it doesn't make sense" category (comments and non-significant spaces are skipped, while /**/ commentis equivalent to a space). Maybe someone can give a scientific explanation

[fxsaber]

A100:

For me, it's a bit of a "can't see why" thing (comments and non-significant spaces are skipped, and the /**/ commentis equivalent to a space). Maybe someone can give a scientific explanation

It explains.

[Anton Ohmat]

I don't understand why everyone ignores this problem!

I have written a code to make sure everyone understands that there is a bug.

#include <Trade\Trade.mqh>

CTrade trade;

bool test = false;
void OnTick(){
     if(!test){
         double bid = NormalizeDouble(SymbolInfoDouble(Symbol(),SYMBOL_BID),_Digits);
         trade.Sell(0.1,NULL,bid,1.0777,0);
         test = true;
     }
}

create an Expert Advisor in MQL5. Put a test date on EURUSD from 2017.04.21 to 2017.04.25 test by OHLC minutes. The chart for the test took H1.

https://charts.mql5.com/16/419/eurusd-i-h1-alpari-international-limited-kakogo-figa.png

So what to do? Where did I screw up? In theory, this should not be the same! The opening prices are the same, although it shouldn't be like this.

The test on all ticks works correctly. But optimizing on all ticks is unrealistic

For the sake of smoothness the chart is as it should be

https://www.mql5.com/ru/charts/7751509/eurusd-i-h1-alpari-international-limited-kak-pravilno

[fxsaber]

Anton Ohmat:

I don't understand why everyone is ignoring this problem!!!

Because it's pointless to react. You think so and the developers think otherwise.

[Anton Ohmat]

fxsaber:

Because it makes no sense to react. You think so and the developers think otherwise.

Oh, bollocks. Well, it's not like the regulations in the installation agreement

[fxsaber]

Anton Ohmat:
Oh, bollocks. Well, not according to the regulations, which are in the agreement at the time of installation

Write to the SR and get a formal refusal there. The forum is for questions/discussions.

[Kirill Belousov]

fxsaber:

Write to the SR and get a formal refusal there. The forum is for questions/discussion.

And my question is being ignored by the local pros for what reason?

P.S. (I have already written to the BOD today - I hope they will clarify it).

[fxsaber]

Kirill Belousov:

And my question is being ignored by the local pros for what reason?

Not a pro, but I didn't even finish reading your well formatted question. Because I do not understand, why should I run an MT4 tester, if an MT5 tester is superior to it in everything(visualization is not interesting)?

You write EAs exactly the same as in MT4, but run them in MT5.

[Kirill Belousov]

fxsaber:

Not a pro, but I didn't even finish reading your well formatted question. I don't understand why I have to run an MT4 tester, if the MT5 tester is superior to it in everything(visualization is not interesting)!

You write EAs in exactly the same way as in MT4, but you run them in MT5.

When you want to see how an MT4 EA works without source code, this option is not an option.

In any case, you expect the tester to match its trades and calculations to what will happen on the real account.

With known and documented limitations

Do you agree?

[fxsaber]

Kirill Belousov:

When you want to see how an MT4 EA works without source code, this option is not an option.

I agree, Market is evil!

In any case, you expect the tester to match its trades and calculations to what will happen on the real.

With known and documented limitations.

Well, you don't need an MT4 tester for that exactly.