MetaTrader 4 Build 529 beta released with new compiler - page 36
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
Who told you that I have UAC disabled? It is possible to work in Windows as an administrator without disabling UAC. And by the way I am not running as root in Windows, I am running as a user with administrative privileges, which is the default in the OS. If you don't understand my question or can't see the difference between superuser and regular admin privileges then post and I'll explain.
Just settle down already.
How many times do I have to explain softly for you. You'll have practice developing client software, work with the masses and then come back to "explain".
If in the indicator parameters, in the Colours tab, press the Reset button,
then all colours of all buffers are not reset to their original state, which is set in #property indicator_colorN, but to a transparent colour, i.e. buffers are not displayed on the chart.
Previously, the behaviour was different - it was reset to the initial colour specified in #property indicator_colorN.
Will the behaviour be corrected, or will it stay that way?
If you change the input parameters of the indicator, the new parameters will only take effect after removing the indicator from the chart and restarting it. This is a problem...
Changing the timeframe does not work.
komposter:
This came from MT5. Seems very right to me.
If the indicator has several hundreds of external variables, and you want to change a few dozens of them, then...
Before reinstalling, you should remember which values of the variables should be saved of those that were changed during the previous setup of the indicator.
This sometimes does not seem realistic... It's not just inconvenient... I can't find the right words to describe the situation vividly...
Besides, through a "machine-gun embrasure" (keyhole) to choose from a list of several hundred parameters needed.... here everyone can add their own words depending on their level of education...
To avoid complaints, why so many parameters, I can add that there was no other way to implement it by existing development tools. And there was no desire to switch to other platforms, such as ensign.
Renat, good afternoon!
You promised not to make any global changes in MQL4: https: //www.mql5.com/ru/forum/146531
And now it turns out that we have to completely change the long-established algorithms. What will happen to the programmes that are now operating on the market? Will they have to be rewritten too? What for?
Renat, good afternoon!
You promised not to make any global changes in MQL4: https: //www.mql5.com/ru/forum/146531
And now it turns out that we have to completely change the long-established algorithms. What will happen to the programmes that are now operating on the market? Will they have to be rewritten too? What for?
Have we been visited by another alarmist or what?
What is your problem?
Who made you download a version of the terminal that is in beta testing in a small circle of the Russian-speaking part of the resource and put your workhorses to work on it?
Renat, good afternoon!
You promised not to make any global changes in MQL4: https: //www.mql5.com/ru/forum/146531
And now it turns out that we have to completely change the long-established algorithms. What will happen to the programmes that are now operating on the market? Will they have to be rewritten too? What for?
What exactly are you referring to?
What is not working for you personally?
What exactly are you referring to?
What is not working for you personally?
Here's the problem: releasing the beta version, you are asking us to test your algorithms based on the logic of MQL4. There is MQL5 that has its own logic. When you read messages saying that something does not work for someone, the answer is: "it came from MQL5: "It has come from MQL5", i.e. it has come from another logic. So, it turns out that we check the symbiosis of MQL5 & MQL4 logics, but there is no such language formed, i.e. no logic or rules. (Another question: must MQL4 be supplemented with MQL5 logic (namely with logic, not protection features or other things that are necessary for Market), thus creating a new language "MQL6"?) The errors that occur during testing of compiled files cannot be tied to anything, because it is unclear why they occur - there is no logic and no rules that would make it clear that something was broken. How can you check errors when you do not know what rules to follow? Do you understand?
Do you understand?
I have read your questions several times and have not understood them at all. We are discussing specifics here.
If an indicator has several hundred external variables and a few dozen need to be changed during installation, then...
Having hundreds of global variables in a program is no good.
OOP and classes completely and dramatically solve the problem by hiding scopes and providing protected access to data.
Here's the problem: when you release a beta version, you are asking us to test your algorithms based on MQL4 logic. There is MQL5, which has its own logic. When you read messages saying that something does not work for someone, the answer is: "it came from MQL5: "It has come from MQL5", i.e. it has come from another logic. So, it turns out that we check the symbiosis of MQL5 & MQL4 logics, but there is no such language formed, i.e. no logic or rules. (Another question: must MQL4 be supplemented with MQL5 logic (namely with logic, not protection features or other things that are necessary for Market), thus creating a new language "MQL6"?) The errors that occur during testing of compiled files cannot be tied to anything, because it is unclear why they occur - there is no logic and no rules that would make it clear that something was broken. How can you check errors when you do not know what rules to follow? Do you understand?