Errors, bugs, questions - page 740

[Yedelkin]

tol64:

So what did you mean by that? That in the absence of an elegant solution, you should not use any at all? Even if there is one, but, as you put it, it is "painful"?

I meant by this that your so called "elegant" last line in tracking block does not improve other 10500 possible lines of this block at all. If it is so important for you to use ExpertRemove() function in int OnInit() instead of return(-100) operator, it is only your own preference which does not improve the rest of the code.

Let me remind you that it all started with your phrase"everything is simpler". As a result, it turned out that there is no simplification at all, just a possible replacement of one line of code with another.

[Yedelkin]

tol64:

There's another option (it must have slipped my mind).

Look at functions: OnTesterInit(), OnTesterPass(), OnTesterDeinit()

And FrameFirst (),FrameFilter (),FrameNext (),FrameInputs (),FrameAdd().

That's exactly what they're for. :)

I'm not familiar with these functions. I don't understand anything from the description. Can you give a simple example to understand their capabilities in our situation?

[Anatoli Kazharski]

Yedelkin:

I wanted to say that your so called "elegant" last line in tracking block does not improve the rest 10500 possible lines of this block at all. If it is so important for you to use ExpertRemove() function in int OnInit() instead of return(-100) operator, it is only your preference, which does not improve the rest of the code in any way.

Let me remind you that it all started with your phrase"everything is simpler". As a result, it turned out that there is no simplification at all, just a possible replacement of one line of code with another.

It is a matter of principle for you if you cannot settle down. :) I gave ExpertRemove() as an example. It is quite suitable in some cases. The "quick solution".

In the previous post, there are specially created tools. I forgot all about them, though I use them actively for some of my tasks.

[Anatoli Kazharski]

Yedelkin:
I'm not familiar with these functions at all. I don't understand anything from the description. Can you give a simple example to understand their capabilities in relation to our situation?

I'll try to make a simple example later...

[Yedelkin]

tol64:

It's fundamental for you if you can't settle down. :)

If it is principled "for me", it is only from the following point of view: you stated that torturous code can be made simpler and more elegant. As it turned out, this statement is far from reality. It turned out that you cannot "simplify" that code so far, you can only "simplify" one line of code and that's all by replacing it with another line. I would be interested to see the actual simplification of the code and not decorative stamps on it.

[Yedelkin]

tol64:
I'll try to make a simple example later...

And we're waiting for an example with tester functions! Maybe it will be of help to many people.

[Anatoli Kazharski]

Yedelkin:
And we're waiting for an example with tester functions! Maybe it will be of help to many.

See Renat's example for now: https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/6407. I may not be able to make my own version for this particular situation today. I'll try to make at least some...

Yedelkin:

... You have stated that tortuous code can be made simpler and more elegant. As it turns out, this statement is far from reality...

Take back what you said. It's a lie or you just misunderstood. :)

[Yedelkin]

tol64: Take back what you said. It's a lie or you just got it wrong. :)

What's with the "take it back" attitude? Yeah, run away :[.

On the subject of accusations of lying:

- Y: I haven't found a solution for the situation at hand either. Of course, you can screw up some block in int OnInit(). But this all looks rather complicated.

- t: It' s much simpler. When executing a condition, you can simply delete the ExpertRemove().

- Y: Since a pass will finish ahead of time with your suggestion, the "tracking block" isn't less bothersome, and the elegance of the block isn't increased in any way.

- t: What do you mean by that? That if you don't have an elegant solution, don't use any at all? Even if there is one, but, as you put it, it's "tedious"?

So you've stated that (1) there is something simpler than a tedious-looking block of code, and (2) you've countered the tedious code with some elegant solution, even though the elegance of the code with your suggestion was rejected.

[Anatoli Kazharski]

Yedelkin:
...

By doing so, you have stated that (1) there is something simpler than a dreary-looking block of code, and (2) countered the dreary code with some elegant solution, even though the elegance of the code with your suggestion has been rejected.

So misunderstood....

Please stop. No one needs this. I meant it exactly as I wrote it. Literally. And you've turned it upside down. That's not what you understood at all. :)

What makes you think that if I asked you a clarifying question it means I stated something? What you highlighted was a question to you, not a statement. I suggest we wrap this up...

[Yedelkin]

tol64:

Then you've got it wrong...

Please stop. No one needs this. I meant it exactly as I wrote it. Literally.

OK. Someone wrote literally "everything is simpler", someone read literally "everything is simpler" - and disagreed. I'll wrap it up as requested. No one else really needs this.