Beta version of MetaTrader 4 IDE including new MQL4 compiler and editor - page 18
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
1. He understood his mistake and it was in the variable names. By the way, I've seen a similar standard for variable naming several times. I wanted to use this method myself, but then I refused it because I had read somewhere that it would be safe for decompilers and they use this very standard for variable naming. So I named them as before, not by their type, but by their name :) 2. What I mean is that 99% is not 100% and it's possible that a person didn't actually use someone else's code but got into the habit of naming their variables that way in their coding. 3. By the way, he apologized later, so why discuss it now...
1. such standards are adopted in decompilers, mostly... Quite a peculiar standard, don't you think? Or Points_For_Close, or gi_34... ...where's the greater semantic weight of the variable?
2. Are you saying that a person who has been programming for 40 years still writes such variable names, which only a green novice would be lazy to write? And then, a month later, when he sees gi_34 on line 5432 of the code, he immediately recalls why he declared this variable at the beginning of the code and what for and why it is saved on line 2356 and used on line 5432? I don't believe it.
3. Asked an affirmation question, an answer was given.Show me a man who has been programming for 40 years.
Show me a man who's been programming for 40 years and never had a clue about Hungarian.
Marasmus?
Sclerosis?
Show me a man who has been programming for 40 years.
Show me a man who's been programming for 40 years and never had a clue about Hungarian.
Marasmus?
Sclerosis?
Well, it turns out that it was the reason why the compiler declared his code decompiled. After all, decompilers use Hungarian notation along with numbers and _
I know people who use it successfully and don't get decompiled messages. It's just that names carry a semantic meaning, not an alphanumeric code.
But he should at least know about it...
Explain maybe what I don't understand ?
how to name variables like dby_45, jhgdf_54, slkjfhk_56 or buystop, takeprofit?
When a person writes a variable for himself he hardly uses this gibberish so that he can guess himself what kind of variable it is and what it represents. It seems to me delirious, I myself write EAs and from time to time I forget what they bear, even in meaningful names .....
artmedia70: " Those who actually write code themselves have never encountered such a compiler entry. "
I agree with this one hundred percent .........
I'm explaining: nonsense written in your example, I didn't write about such naming of variables. Read my post above where I answered the man why he may have a problem. Or you can see the result of decompilation, then see how the decompiler logically names variables, but not as in your example, it's just gibberish in the names of variables.
The logic of what? Hungarian?
Okay. We now know that they are global int and global double. So? Parsing the logic (that's only about a tenth of the code):
I've renamed half of these variables myself, parsing the logic of the brutally and mercilessly slowing down indecker. I wanted to optimize it but failed...
I failed, not because I couldn't, but because I was too exhausted to identify what the variables are responsible for, to trace the logic. Then I realized that the effort is not worth the simple test its readings in the tester (in the form in which it is absolutely unsuitable for the tester - even at opening prices for one pass takes about 10 seconds)
The logic of what? Hungarian?
Okay. We now know that they are global int and global double. So? Parsing the logic (that's only about a tenth of the code):
I've renamed half of these variables myself, parsing the logic of the brutally and mercilessly slowing down indecker. I wanted to optimize it but it failed...
It failed, not because I couldn't, but because I had too much trouble figuring out what the variables are responsible for to be able to track the logic. Then I realized that the effort is not worth the cost of a simple tester test (in the form in which it is absolutely unusable for the tester - even at opening prices it takes about 10 seconds for one pass).
Now I see that you can say a lot of things without purpose. Why is this example given to me? I only understood that having written about your negative attitude to those who use other people's code, you decided to show everyone how decent you are etc. But after reading this example, I understand that you do use code written by someone else :) Anyway, I've made it clear that I had a desire to name variables that way before, but I gave it up in the end. So I don't need to bring up something I don't need as an example and this thread isn't created for such a rubbish :)