Public discussion of the formula for calculating the cost of resources in the MQL5 Cloud Network - page 35
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
I know people who cannot imagine working without lots and multiple orders, which makes sense.
If in MT5 you could place multiple TP or SL on one position with partial closing of that position, it would be similar to MT4, but on MT5 you make a refill, all stops and takeaways have to be placed again, if a robot, no problem, but it's extremely inconvenient by hand. Sorry to be off-topic, but this is why people don't want to switch from old to new.
Judging by these emotions you do not understand the essence of what is being said. I will say it again - it is possible to ensure full compatibility of MT4 code and functionality with MT5 platform.
Strategies can be adapted (tried), but you will not get full compatibility (100% compatibility) in a large number of cases.
I am not saying that you cannot get it at all, on certain strategies you can, but you cannot do it on quite complex trading strategies.
Yes I did, 2$ bonus and 43 cents from rent =/
You don't seem to understand the platforms.
kindergarten.
There was a question as to why platform compatibility is not done when technically and conceptually there is no problem with it.
1. These are two different philosophies. When it comes to simple strategies: "Open a position, put TP/SL", "Add a position, put TP/SL" maybe everything will work. But try to implement a complex strategy, with locking, with reversals and cutting unprofitable positions (exactly unprofitable in terms of "NETTING" of MT5).
2. As forthe "virtual machine" that emulates the work of MT4.
Firstly, if you want it can be done on your own (but in most cases it will be meaningless and inefficient). Secondly, the developers have already mentioned that logic won in the matter of combining both ways of working with orders, because combining two "philosophies" of work is so absurd that the subject is not even worth bringing up.
MrGold166:
And another comment to your statement:"the total position is counted on the terminal side, not the server side."
The requirement of a total position comes from the server side, it's a global practice.
How to count is a dealer's business, in the end the position is always aggregate (the imbalance of buy/sell is always maintained and accounted for on the server side). The exchanges and other brokers (for which MT5 was developed) are another matter, for them the presence of lots or other multidirectional positions is akin to "marasmus".
I am sure few people believe that on, say, the NYSE (or any other civilized exchange) they allow to trade with the use of "locks".
MrGold166:
In general, if the EA opens differently directed orders, its strategy has been developed by an incompetent person. The influence of spread, even of 1 point, is so huge that it is nonsense to open it at every step.
So I would dispute this assertion.
And in general really such strategies are at least "not working" from the point of view of the CIVILIZED MARKET.
Andrew, really, your questions show a complete lack of understanding of platforms and clearing in particular.
You're asking for something from the developers that can't happen in principle.
1. In principle it could be, but not with MQ. At least at the current time for any other company, for any other terminal, but not for MT5.
The virtualization can be implemented independently, programmatically (if necessary). That's what the developers are and will be standing on.
2. Another thing is if, say, during the development of MT6 our clients (and as we know it is not you and me) will demand to combine both systems of working with orders, but this is fantasy and philosophizing on an empty space.
Andrei01:
2. i'm not asking for anything - i don't need it. the platforms suit me fine, but it's a shame about the failure to promote MT5 among the traders although it can provide all the functionality of MT4 without changing the code.
There is nothing wrong with the advancement of Platvorma. The problems are with CUHHONY-type dilynes, and those brokers who can't provide normal tech support for the new platform.
I know people who cannot imagine working without locks and multiple orders, which makes sense.
If you could place several TP or SL on one position with partial closing of this position, it would be similar to MT4, while on MT5 you need to re-set all stops and takei's. If you use a robot, it's no problem, but it's extremely inconvenient using your hands. Sorry to be off-topic, but this is why people don't want to switch from old to new.
Why is it not possible? Put the right number of pending orders with the right volume and in the right places. Everything is OK with manual operation, it's not much more difficult than in MT4.
But this is until the work is done with positive positions, as soon as you get to the negative zone, the nuances and specifics of NETTING start appearing.
What makes you think they don't want to, they very much do and you have no idea how many people want to work on MT5. When VTB24 implemented MT5 on real account it caused a confusion. They were expecting not many traders to sign up for MT5 in the first phase but they ended up with 65,000 people applying in a day.
Interesting
You're missing the point. At the stage of strategy development like Ilan or FxClon (2 mirror strategies without indicators by the way) the presence of lots is used to confuse suckers so that they :
a) buy the Expert Advisor
b) register for an affiliate.
In reality, we have the following situation:
1) Not a trader (especially trader, not the one who considers himself as such) will not use locks in trade.
2) Not a single programmer in his right mind will not write an EA using locks for himself, and what the client asked is the business of the client.
For the aeroplane, thank you, I tried) the second one has already crashed ;)
It is like religion - it cannot be proved. If a person believes that compatibility is 100%, let us not interfere.
1. these are two different philosophies. When it comes to simple strategies: "opened a position, put TP/SL", "filled a position, put TP/SL", maybe everything will work. But try to implement a complex strategy, with locking, with reversals and trimming of unprofitable positions (exactly unprofitable in terms of "NETTING" of MT5).
2. Secondly, the developers have already mentioned that logic won in the matter of combining both ways of working with orders, because combining two "philosophies" of work is so absurd that it is not worth bringing up the topic.
1. The postulate can be proved or disproved, provided that the discussion is between adequate people who, instead of concrete things, do not use turns such as "this is a religion" or "this is a kindergarten", because they are able to formulate their thoughts sensibly instead of emitting incoherent emotions.
The proof is simple - it comes from the essence of platforms that are mathematically equivalent. I hope you will not argue with this. What remains to be understood is that what is mathematically executed on the server side in one platform is executed on the terminal side in another. No one else is involved in the process, which means that the same calculations can be easily transferred from one part to another, which only requires appropriate technical implementation. Do you understand this simple idea or should I explain it in details with examples? It is ridiculous to ask thousands of traders to recalculate the start strategy, when all this can be done automatically as part of the MT5 platform.
2. What is the absurdity and logical contradiction in your opinion? I have not found any logical contradiction, and so far no one has given me any, except for emotional expressions.
1. In principle this could certainly be the case, but not with MQ. At least at the current time with any other company, any other terminal, but not with MT5.
The virtualization can be implemented independently, programmatically (if necessary). That's what the developers are and will be standing on.
2. Another thing is if, say, during the development of MT6 our clients (and as we know it is not you and me) will demand to combine both systems of working with the orders, but this is fantasy and philosophizing on an empty space.
1. As already explained the functionality of MT4 can be implemented on MT5. If you still do not understand how, I can explain again - it is not difficult at all, if you understand at least a little bit of the platforms. So it is unclear what is the point of not doing it.
The answer above - there is no need in MT6, everything is realizable within MT5.