Errors, bugs, questions - page 476

[Stanislav Korotky]

Yedelkin:

I'm not interested in manual trading, so I can't add anything substantial. The current logic can probably be explained by the developers themselves.

Alternatively, you can submit your question in the form of a request for a service-desk.

I'm afraid that helpdesk will answer me something familiar like - no one has complained before you, so everything is fine. So I need to get the public's opinion first. Maybe I'm wrong and it's a small thing, but still, imho, it can put users on the money, as the stop-loss for example will be set much closer to the market than one is used to in a four.

[[Deleted]]

marketeer:
I'm afraid that service-desk will say something familiar like - no one has complained before, so everything is fine. So I need to get the public's opinion first. Maybe I'm wrong and it is a small thing, but still, imho, it can put users on the money, because the stop-loss, for example, is set much closer to the market than one is used to in 4.

The current scheme is quite logical and understandable. There is no point in adding anything else to it (the developers have always strived for simplicity).

The behaviour has been changed in accordance with the netting scheme, where it is perfectly logical to set SL/TP either at a specified price level or at the current (planned) price of the position.

The position price should be understood as the cumulative price of all trades that formed the position.

[[Deleted]]

To the developers of

Questions of this nature:

1. If I understand that if I change the trading account during the testing, the test will stop?

2. Is it possible to make the Strategy Tester "call" to a certain account during its operation, without paying attention to trader's actions in the terminal?

PS

3) There is no connection with the server (no connection with an access server), but the orders are displayed in the history. At the same time, HistorySelect returns false.

Is it supposed to be like this?

[Stanislav Korotky]

Interesting:

The current scheme is quite logical and understandable. There is no point in adding anything else to it (the developers have always strived for simplicity).

The behaviour has been changed in accordance with the netting scheme, in which it is perfectly logical to set SL/TP either at a specified price level or at the current (planned) price of the position.

The position opening price should be understood as an aggregate price that is the result of all deals that formed the position.

I do not suggest to add anything. I only pointed out the inconsistency of MT4 and MT5, which may cause problems. If the indentation in 4 was made from the order price, and in 5 from the position, then everything would be logical: we have moved to a netting platform and changedthe "anchor point". But the point is that the indent in 4 is made at the market price (and therefore, it would be no less logical and expected by the user). It does not say anything about the position. Verbatim: Stop levels must be specified in the number of points from the order placing price. Maybe, it is an inaccuracy in the documentation but I want to fix it. Does it really refer to an order or a position?

[Alexander Puzikov]

Good morning everyone, there is a moment when in the parameters of

it is necessary to specify what dimension array

time t1[what] and open price[what]

where what is in the parameters

input int what    = 120

But it's not so easy - I got the error - invalid index value

Could you please advise how to implement this to change the

How to change index values without going into code when testing the EA?

It's all related to the period of the Expert Advisor for long-term or short-term (120) trading

Or medium term

[Slava]

Im_hungry:

Good morning everyone, a moment has arisen when in the parameters of

it is necessary to specify what dimension array

time t1[what] and open price[what]

where what is in the parameters

But it's not so easy - I got the error - invalid index value

Could you please advise how to implement this to change the

How to change index values without going into code when testing the EA?

It's all related to the period of the Expert Advisor for long-term or short-term (120) trading

Or medium term

In your case, you need to use dynamic arrays

datetime t1[];
double   open[];

input int what=120;

int OnInit()
  {
   if(ArrayResize(t1,what)!=what || ArrayResize(open,what)!=what)
      return(-1);
...
   return(0);
  }

[Alexey Da]

Interesting:

To the developers

The questions are as follows:

1. As I understand it, if I change the trading account at the time of testing the strategy, the test will stop?

2. Is it possible to make the tester "call" to a certain account during its operation, and not pay attention to the trader's actions in the terminal?

PS

3. There is no connection with the server (no connection with an access server), but the history shows the orders. HistorySelect returns false.

Is it meant to be like this?

1, 2 - yes, that's how it is at the moment. The thing is that during the operation the tester can initiate paging of any additional data, which, when changing the server/account, may cause receiving incorrect data (data from another server).

3. You see the data blind from the previous query. a new query is not possible if there is no connection to the server.

[[Deleted]]

alexvd:

1, 2 - yes, this is the way it is currently done. The point is that the tester may initiate paging of any additional data in the process, which if the server/account is changed may result in incorrect data (other server's data).

3. You see the data cast from the previous query. a new query is not possible if there is no communication with the server.

1,2 - I see, thank you.

[[Deleted]]

marketeer:
I am not suggesting to add anything. I only drew attention to the inconsistency of MT4 and MT5, which may cause problems. If the indentation in 4 was made from the order price, and in 5 from the position, then everything would be logical: we have moved to a netting platform and changedthe "binding point". But the point is that the indent in 4 is made at the market price (and therefore, it would be no less logical and expected by the user). It does not say anything about the position. Verbatim: Stop levels must be specified in the number of points from the order placing price. Maybe, it is an inaccuracy in the documentation but I want to fix it. Is it from an order or from a position?

1. I can't be exact, I remember it vaguely. But if my memory is correct, when setting/modifying an order, SL and TP can only be specified as a specific price level.

If we are speaking about position changing, there are two ways to fit SL/TP: by specifying a price level and by specifying a number of pips.

If we consider a position, then the count of points in the netting mode will be calculated from the average price of all deals that formed the position (current price of opening a position).

This is if we are talking about the manual mode.

2. If we are talking about mechanical trading, then there is always a specific price level (how it is calculated is another question).

[Rashid Umarov]

marketeer:
I am not suggesting that anything should be added. I only drew attention to the inconsistency between MT4 and MT5, which could cause problems. If the indentation in 4 was made from the order price, and in 5 from the position, then everything would be logical - we have moved to a netting platform and changedthe "anchor point". But the point is that the indent in 4 is made at the market price (and therefore, it would be no less logical and expected by the user). It does not say anything about the position. Verbatim: Stop levels must be specified in the number of points from the order placing price. Maybe, it is an inaccuracy in the documentation but I want to fix it. Is it from an order or from a position?

Thank you, we will figure it out.