Why valenok2003 is against MT5 - page 8
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
They will help, I would apply them to the orders instead of SL and TP subpositions. In MT4 you don't need it, but in 5 you do for me personally, that's why I'm looking at it askew.
Gentlemen, think about what exactly goto does in multilevel code, where there are a lot of automatically constructed and deinitialized objects at different visibility levels?
Imagine how beautifully goto rips up the instruction execution flow, moves out of scope, jumps into someone else's (!!!) scope and what happens to implicitly called object destructors?
As long as you look at primitive code without objects and don't get to the level of understanding the assembly language implementation, you won't notice any problems. C++ compiler authors would love to cut goto out of the specs forever, but legacy holds.
To make it clear, I'll repeat the keywords again: it jumps into alien realms, violating the construction/destruction threads of objects created in different scopes.
Let's go over it again, I understand correctly when using lots :
1. open BUY 1 lot + SELL 1 lot at 1.3340
2. Close BUY 1 at 1.3364 and open SELL 1 at 1.3364
3. At 1.3309 we close 2 SELL and open 1 BUY
4. We close BUY 1 at the price 1.3316.
I have missed the TP above on one order. It is as follows
Why is valenok2003 against MT5?
There are strategies, most of them manual, in which it is much more convenient to keep track of individual orders than the "average temperature in the hospital".
Besides, each order has its own SL and TP which is difficult and sometimes impossible to be done in one order.
This has nothing to do with locks as it is just a special case.
It is an obvious thing, but it seems to me that MC hasn't grasped it yet.
In general, writing a new MT5 terminal only for years for the sake of a total position, which we can easily implement in a slightly upgraded MT4, is of course a mozahism.
To make it clear, I'll repeat the key words again: jumping into other people's areas with disrupted construction/destruction streams of objects created in different areas of visibility.
jelizavettka: При попытке установить МТ5 на компьютер выдает: Процессор должен поддерживать набор инструкций sse2
Ay-yi-yi, and what kind of pebble do you have in your desktop? Some kind of Sempron?
There are strategies, most of them manual, in which it is much more convenient to monitor individual orders than the "average temperature in the hospital".
Besides, each order has its own SL and TP which is difficult and sometimes impossible to implement in one average order.
This has nothing to do with locks as it is just a special case.
This is an obvious thing, but it seems to me that the MC has not yet understood it.
And in general it is of course a mosey to write a new MT5 terminal only for the sake of a total position, which can easily be implemented in a slightly modernized MT4.
Yes!!!!!!!!!
One order above missed the TP. That's right.
Okay. That's why I asked again - I got 117, not 86 for a loc.
Now netting:
1. Do nothing (opening a lock is the same as the absence of the position)
2. 2. 2 SELL 1.3364.
3. Closed 2 SELL 1.3309
4. 1 BUY 1.3309 is opened
5. Closed 1 BUY 1.3316
Total: 2x55 (1.3364-1.3309=55) + 1x7 (1.3316-1.3309=7) = 117
Where is the difference ?