Errors, bugs, questions - page 2287

New comment
 
When you start single run or Optimization by real ticks on custom symbol, where there are no ticks (disappeared, for example), then Tester immediately finishes its work with the following records at the end
2018.09.12 22:35:08.281 Tester  Experts\fxsaber\Test.ex5 on FILTER_EURUSD.rann_RannForex,M1 from 2018.02.26 00:00 to 2018.09.12 00:00
2018.09.12 22:35:08.281 Tester  FILTER_EURUSD.rann_RannForex: history data begins from 2018.02.26 00:00

There's no hint anywhere as to why the job was terminated (no real ticks) and, in general, that there was some kind of breakdown.


Is it possible to inform in the log about this moment?

 

700K passes Optimisation, takes approximately 4 hours. After 1.7K passes, press Stop and restart. This is an approximate time.

It means that optimizer gets 1.7K records from cache and calculates them in a second. Hence, it estimates time is so low.


How would you correct this behaviour so that the computation time is adequate after Stop/Start?

 
At the end of Optimization Tester gives this
Tester  optimization finished, total passes 691200 (successful 673286 passes)

successfull are passes that have reached the end. The rest are passes that were aborted by ExpertRemove.


By which flag does Tester classify passes received from Agents? How to read this flag in OnTesterPass?

 

here is an unpleasant point:


when optimising for all currencies in the market overview, the Header columns of the results table are not visible

build 1881 MT5


 
Vladislav Andruschenko:

here is an unpleasant point:


when optimising for all currencies in the market overview, the Header columns of the results table are not visible

build 1881 MT5


Thank you. Corrected
 
I got here because Service Desk has gone somewhere. Where? How do I complain that the push notification service has stopped working again?
 

Is it possible to return to the language an implicit conversion of an array of pointers to basic types, as it was in older versions of the compiler? Or at least to void* type?

class A { };

void f(void*&array[]) { }

void Main() { A*array[]; f(array); }

There's no contradiction there. If each pointer can be implicitly cast, why can't the entire array be cast? The pointers are the same,no changes need to be made to the array, it's just a question of interpretation.

You just have to recopy the array otherwise. And in the case of its modification, you have to recopy it back later. This is a waste of money. If a function is defined as a template, it cannot be used as a virtual one. It gets very inflexible.

Or you may add an explicit array conversion option: (void*&[])array

 
Alexey Navoykov:

You just have to recopy the array otherwise. And if you modify it, you have to recopy it back afterwards. This is a waste of money. If a function is defined as a template, it cannot be used as a virtual one. It gets very inflexible.

And with templates?
 
When the "Autoscroll ..." button is pressed on a day off, when there are no ticks, I decided to put graphical objects on the stories, I did, but after editing them the chart automatically flies to the end, i.e. autoscrolling is performed, which is not convenient.
 
Igor Makanu:

Today is your day off? MQL also has Saturdays and Sundays off!

ZS: google help, trading session times

Yeah：：) I'm new at this, forgot to see what day of the week it is. I deleted the comment earlier when I realised what it was about) But thanks for the tip!

1...228022812282228322842285228622872288228922902291229222932294...3191
New comment