Gentlemen site developers - please write correctly in Russian - page 2
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
No, you're obviously definitely off the subject, this phrase "Write an expert" questions arise in the threads year after year.
Read my second post (08:28). Two hours ago I reported that I understood the line about "dialogues with a big beard" and at the same time stated the theme of the dialogues:"Unpleasant to read illiterate official texts" vs "... I don't see the problem".
If necessary, I confirm that I was " definitely off topic". Which does not at all preclude the marketeer from having grounds for recourse.
All in all, peace, friendship and bubblegum :)
By the way, followed the jargon link. Turns up an article "How to order a trading robot in MQL5 and MQL4". Is this also a result of "dialogues about nothing"? :)
It's an interesting topic. I am publishing an excerpt from my correspondence with the support team on this topic:
C-4:
Описание проблемы: грамматическая ошибка в описании функции
Справочник MQL5 / Общие функции / GetPointer
Данную функцию можно использовать как проверку указателя на валидность. Значение, отличное от нуля, гарантирует, что по указателю можно доступаться.
Customer Service:
1. What is the grammatical error?
2. Your suggestions?
C-4 2010.07.29 15:03
In this case, the particle'to be' was used with reflexive verbs to indicate a non-transitive action (e.g. software to be tested), making the verb reflexive (e.g. to be tested), and in some other cases. In this case, an attempt was made to form a new verb "to access" by adding the particle - to, to an inanimate masculine noun. The rules of the Russian language do not determine the formation of new verbs from nouns by adding to them the particle - to. Otherwise, there would be similar verbs in Russian, such as regime (from the word regime), and woodpecker (from the word woodpecker, apparently this verb could mean "to behave like a bird woodpecker"). That is why the 70,000-word spelling dictionary edited by Tikhonov, as well as the Russian language itself, does not and cannot contain such words as mode, woodpecker and access.
Helpdesk:
Hard to say - http://www.slova.ru/article/7258.html (link to Dal's Dictionary)
С-4
Still, you cited an example from Dahl's explanatory dictionary. It is a really good dictionary, and in its time it was an authoritative source, but time flies forward, and what was correct from a grammatical and lexical point of view 150 years ago is no longer used today. It is therefore better to rely on modern norms of the Russian language.
Support service:
Quite in use. In a professional programming environment. But in this context, it's better not to use words "valid" and "access" because they are slang words.
After these words I fell off the chair:). Although the error was corrected.
With the Arabs, texts written down 1,000 years ago read like those of today.
Their grammar is protected by the state.
Arabic I know, read and write without a dictionary.
Their vocabulary is very well developed.
With the Arabs, texts written down 1,000 years ago read like those of today.
Their grammar is protected by the state.
Arabic I know, read and write without a dictionary.
Their vocabulary is very well developed.
I daresay that in Arabic, sentences are considered correct:
I go berry picking in the woods is fun.
The weather is good.
The water flows down the cliff.
And in Russian there are all sorts of cases, genera, rules...
For Arabs, the correct language is Arabic with Arabic letters, not Russian letters.
For Arabs, the correct language is Arabic with Arabic letters, not Russian letters.
Are there any such wonders in Arabic?
run - run - run - run - run
-------------------------------
I looked it up on pedigrees, it's there, but it's simpler than in Russian.
And"How to write an expert or indicator" means in Russian, right?
Sure.
In my opinion, in the phrase "please write correctly in Russian" it was correct to underline the word please with commas. ;)
In forums it is not customary to pay attention to punctuation marks. But it is grammatical mistakes that hurt.
Postings on forums are often written out of order - that's fine, but the text on the site itself must be correct. Right now it is written in the 'basement':
How to write an Expert Advisor or an indicator
The genitive and accusative cases of homogeneous complements are monstrously mixed up here. To write whom/what is expert (genitive), but who/what is indicator (accusative).
If you are an apologist for the use of the genitive case, then write How to write expert and indicator, but actually this is not Russian.
Correct: How to write expert or indicator.
It is unpleasant to read illiterate official texts.
How to build a mine (tower, farm) or house. How to build a mine (tower, farm) or house? How to build a mine (tower, farm) or house? Which option is correct?
How to build a mine or a house. How to build a mine or house? How to build a mine or a house? Which is the right option?
Mm-hmm. Mine (tower, farm) is feminine. House or expert is masculine. The first option is correct.
Therefore:
write a novel
write a landscape
write a law
write a title
write a dictation
write a code
write an indicator
write an expert, etc.
... A fun topic, though :)