Invalid request - just started and can't figure it out... - page 5
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
6
uncleVik
No.
Of course, I'm sorry, but this is what a Standard library is for, it contains typical solutions. The processing of trading errors greatly depends on trader's preferences.
So, dear friends, it's "do-it-yourself".
7
tol64
In any case, you'll probably have to wait until the company has higher priorities. Perhaps it will be implemented sometime in the near future. Here I decided not to wait, as I really don't like waiting and have already implemented it a long time ago. It didn't take long at all. Moreover, I did it at the very beginning of learning the language. You could write your request to the Service Desk. What if I do? ))
8
Beginner
Anyone can implement it in any way they like. Are you sure that everything is optimally done correctly and beautifully? Of course, there can be many variants, but one typical of the developers is enough to customize it to your needs or use it as it is.
9
-Alexey-
What does this have to do with preferences? Who knows better than you the capabilities of the server side setup? No one. You can define the adequate response - typical, and the trader will tweak it according to his taste and knowledge. The timings in the exchange protocols and so on? Does the trader trade or go deeper into studying the errors? The programmer should write algorithms or study the errors? The programmer should study the API for writing an emulator (for a glitchy one) of auto-trading in case of server failure or should he/she write algorithms? How much time to spend on this instead of trading?
And without this, you can't talk about the applicability of the library and the wizard, and there's no talk of them as off-the-shelf solutions. Only a tester, otherwise it's a waste of money. And this should be written in bold letters everywhere.
p.s. I'll tell you another secret, that one of the experienced programmers participants of the forum - refused to undertake the task of porting my code to 5 - think for yourself why.
p.s. I will tell you another secret that one of the experienced programmers of the forum participants - refused to take up the task of porting my code to A - think for yourself why.
That is, you can not write programs yourself (and therefore have no understanding and experience in programming), but you demand an automatic workaround that is most dangerous and requires linking to the business logic of the expert itself?
Read carefully my answer: https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/7937/page5#comment_367252 - every word is verified there.
That is, you cannot write programs yourself (and therefore have no understanding and experience in programming), but you require automatic working out what is most dangerous and requires linking to the business logic of the EA itself?
Read my answer carefully: https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/7937/page5#comment_367252 - every word is verified there.
Then there is no problem either.
If you think you can offer universal logic for automatic handling of server failures, then write and publish your library or extend the existing one. It's enough to implement just one class similar to CTrade.I can make an offer. For a decent sum of money, maybe I would do it, if you don't want to, but why, a four is enough for everyone for a long time to come.
I don't believe in your claims made in this thread.
My opinion - this is picking on without understanding the essence of the processes, and even with the astonishing position of "I do not write myself and do not intend to write. Statements about "can/should" are not serious.
I don't believe in anything you said above in this thread.
Of course, it's convenient for you. Here's a link to the thread: (where you can see it's not just my questions and assertions)
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/3948/page9
Regarding programming experience - here are the words of one of your moderators on one of my works:
However, the code is not small at all...P.S. I already admire the grandiosity of the approach. And how much time did you spend on it, if not a secret?
Though it's convenient for you to say "forget it, it's not serious...".
But seriously, even if you can't offer such a solution - what to say about users, for whom the wizard and the library were written just for.
And with an amazing attitude of "I don't write it myself and I'm not going to write it".