[Archive] Learn how to make money villagers! - page 361

[RVD]

OnGoing:
Now the buy has validated. It's a miracle...

and I don't have one(

[Роман]

OnGoing:
...Miracles...

Perhaps this is the intrigue of the World Consortium of Banks, which by such partial execution of orders, picks up a key to this TS-ka on osma to drain the DEPs, albeit demo ones... :-)

[RVD]

I sat down again and didn't open it at all) I'll keep digging for the problem

[Лекарь Центозависимых]

Roman.:

Perhaps this is the machinations of the World Consortium of Banks, which, by such partial execution of orders, picks up a key to this TS-ka on osma to drain the DEPs, albeit demo ones... :-)

Useless, then we will have to ban locs and osma on all computers in the world)

[Лекарь Центозависимых]

RVD:
I don't think it opened at all) I'll dig what's the problem

I have the opposite, went to trade in the normal mode) Well, I'll understand slowly (in parallel with the work), maybe check the entry conditions in a separate function, maybe because of this capricious.

Although I still cannot understand how the terminal log may contain the information that the sell was successfully opened but the sell was not there)

[RVD]

OnGoing:

I have the opposite, went to trade in the normal mode) Well, I'll understand slowly (in parallel with the work), maybe check the entry conditions in a separate function, maybe because of this capricious.

Although, I still cannot understand how the terminal log may contain the information that the sell was successfully opened without the presence of the sell)

Yes strange) probably afraid they there)

[Роман]

OnGoing:

...

Although, it still does not make sense in my mind, how could there be a record in the terminal log that the sell is successfully opened, but there is no sell)

That's right, that's right... :-) that's what I'm talking about... :-)

Of course, we should look at the code.

[Sergey Guliaev]

Roman.:

That's right, that's right... :-) that's what I'm talking about... :-)

You have to watch the code, of course.

I personally always use the real opening check, not trusting the returned value

//+-------
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
//|   [e-mail]                                05.07.2011
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
//| check_open_order() ПРОВЕРКА реального открытия рыночного ордера по тикету
//| Требует:
//| - тикет ордера 
//| Возвращает тикет открытого ордера или -1
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
int check_open_order(int _Ticket)
{  string _Function = "check_open_order(): ";
//--------
   if(_Ticket > 0)
   {  OrderSelect(_Ticket,SELECT_BY_TICKET);             
      if(OrderType() <= 1)
      {  output_mov_string(order_type_in_txt(OrderType())+ " успешно открыт!", Clr_Report);
         output_sound(Name_Sound_Open);
      }
      else _Ticket = -1;
   }
//--------
   return(_Ticket);
}
//+-------------------------------------------------------------------
//+-------

[Лекарь Центозависимых]

valenok2003:

I personally always use real opening check, not trusting the returned value

Dak didn't change standard procedure, only added additional condition on the input)

But maybe because I've already put it on a block with OrderSend, I'll try earlier.

[[Deleted]]

valenok2003:

I personally always use a real opening check, not trusting the returned value

Great. But how do you check the closure?