Write an advisor - page 3
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
You should have written it this way - and you're done.
I've seen several EA constructors, usually you choose an indicator and it generates a signal for a trade operation. Everything is rather cheesy and is designed to attract suckers to the site.
You're wrong, Alexei.
I think it is a very useful feature for those who want to understand the principles of EA construction.
Learning to write EAs, indicators and scripts in MQL5 is not very difficult. You do not need to learn a programming language.
The first step is to start small: you set a task and learn MQL5 while solving it. You will study MQL5 Reference at the same time.
It will take you years. Or maybe I'm the dumb one.
everyone goes their own way
MQL is actually a very simple language, but it's very specialized, it's designed for one task, so if you have programming experience in, say, Pascal or C, then the whole learning process comes down to understanding these nuances, which are mostly related to the market, and if you have experience in trading, everything will be easy. But if there is no programming experience at all... What's more, if mathematics is not very good... The problem of mastering programming in this language is almost impossible, you will need a lot of time and effort. If you're the second case, you need to start with the basics of programming, I would recommend Pascal. Once you understand the basics - variables and their types, loops, conditions (it would be nice to learn the logic), functions and procedures. Then you can start with mql.
Of course, all scripts in MS Office are written in his VBA dialect.
One of Edsger Dijkstra's "calling cards" was the statement:
Students who have previously studied BASIC are almost impossible to teach good programming. As potential programmers they are mentally crippled with no hope of recovery[3].
Original text
It is practically impossible to teach good programming to students that have had a prior exposure to BASIC: as potential programmers they are mentally mutilated beyond hope of regeneration.
Sounds like a load of crap to me.
I started with BASIC, that classic one, and wrote my first rather successful program (the memory game on the EC1010) in it.
It didn't prevent me from writing in Pascal, C, C++ and Assembler.
In my opinion, this is complete nonsense.
I started with BASIC, that classic one, and wrote my first relatively successful program (the "memory" game on the EC1010) in it.
This did not prevent me from writing in Pascal, C, C++ and Assembler.
But start writing from Pascal and nothing will change, BASIC is a useless step. Besides, it makes it hard to learn normal languages, because it is a simplified language, something like excel at the dawn of the computer era, anyone could calculate something simple without having programming skills in it. And in fact the skills were neither required nor developed.
I'm curious, why start in Basic or Pascal? You have to learn to drive a car in our bucket too, don't you?
In general, I would advise to start with OOP theory, something like Weisfeld, then the concept of algorithms - there are plenty of books, you can take UML as software, and that's all, and then write in whatever you want, the only things left are language syntax and the logic of the subject area.
But start writing in Pascal and nothing will change, Basics is a useless step. In addition, it makes it difficult to learn normal languages because it is a highly simplified language, something like Excel at the dawn of the computer era, anyone could calculate something simple without programming skills in it. And in fact the skills were neither required nor developed.
I don't know, I don't know.
Pascal - really, nothing much will change. Because if you don't use all sorts of OOP-wisdom, Pascal isn't much different from Basic.
Not to say that VBA is very much used language. I don't understand what's "abnormal" about it?
I don't know, I don't know.
Pascal - really, nothing much will change. Because if you don't use all sorts of OOP nonsense, Pascal isn't much different from Basic.
Not to say that VBA is very much used language. I don't understand what's "abnormal" about it.
Pascal teaches you how to use different types of variables and how to convert from one type to another. It teaches the use of normal loops and conditions. It teaches the use of procedures and functions. In BASIC this is not there at all, just plain text in English with mathematical formulas pasted in. After learning BASIC, a person will only understand i=i+1. There is nothing else there.
Pascal teaches how to use different types of variables, and how to translate from one type to another. It teaches how to use normal loops and conditions. It teaches how to use procedures and functions. In BASIC this is not there at all, just plain text in English with mathematical formulas pasted in. After learning BASIC, a person will only understand i=i+1. There is nothing else there.
Isn't that enough?
In BASIC you can not always translate from one variable to another, loops and conditions are exactly the same as in Pascal. This is the first time I've heard that there are no procedures and functions in BASIC, I've always used a lot of functions, when I was a student, and even now, when I use VBA. You don't seem to have written much in BASIC...
I've written a program in Excel, which calculates a three-dimensional graph model, optimizes it, and then outputs it as a chart. There's a lot in this programme that you don't think can be found in Basics.