What is a tester's Grail? - page 15

 
George Merts:

And on the subject of virtualisation everywhere...

... What's more, it's not even clear if this thing actually exists. Or all your actions with the received "nothing" are controlled by an entirely different entity. I think it's cool.

There is no need to take virtualization to the point of absurdity, much less encourage it everywhere.

Here's an example of your virtualisation translated into real life:

you want to see the girl Masha, you call, Pasha comes pretending to be Masha.

Here is your virtualization in real life. Now I ask you, is it cool?

With respect.

 
Andrey Kisselyov:

There is no need to take virtualisation to the point of absurdity, let alone encourage it everywhere.

here is an example of your virtualisation translated into real life:

you want to see the girl Masha, you call, Pasha comes pretending to be Masha.

here is your virtualisation in real life. now I ask you, is that cool?

That's right! A perfect example.

If you had a request "I want to see Masha from accounting department, who will tell me why my accounting software is showing me shit" and programmer Pasha comes to explain me what's wrong - I would be no less happy, if Masha came. Perhaps even more.

Another thing is that you need to ask for the exact interface you need. Of course, if you need sex, and came programmer Pasha instead of Masha - you will not be happy. However, you will immediately see the discrepancy, and still "at compile time" eliminate the mistake.

And if you have access directly to objects - then having requested Masha for sex - you can get in the face from Masha itself, and then - and from a spouse who came to get Masha.

Virtualization allows you to limit your request to what you need for a particular action in a particular place. Everything else is cut off. The only limitation, in my opinion, is the "overhead" of designing all these virtual interfaces. If we want to "quickly" check the idea of a simple indicator, it is unreasonable to make all these OOP complexities.

 
George Merts:

The only limitation, in my opinion, is the "overhead" of designing all these virtual interfaces. If we want to "quickly" check the idea of a simple indicator, then it's unreasonable to create all these OOP complexities.

I think this is the main limitation that slows down the work of any EA in the tester environment during optimization. If you decisively optimize your EAs, it will obviously increase your optimization time, because I've said and will say that any virtualization (be it an OOP or a division of threads in the CPU core) increases the runtime and reduces the performance of your computer.

OOP is designed solely for the convenience of programmers, at the expense of computer performance.

Respectfully.

 
Stefan Stoyanov:

I have two products for free

Lockdown protection

Doesn't always help.


don't you have a free grail?) or a working strategy?

 
Andrey Kisselyov:

I think this is the main limitation that slows down any EA in the tester environment during optimization. If you decisively optimize your EAs, it will obviously increase your optimization time. As I've said before and will keep saying any virtualization (be it OOP or thread splitting in CPU core) increases the runtime and reduces the performance of your computer.

OOP is designed solely for the convenience of programmers, at the expense of computer performance.

Respectfully.


The word "delaying" somehow scares opponents of OOP )))) It's better to use the phrase "introduces a delay".

And now a killer question - what percentage of it? After all, no one tried to make tests, only on the forum yada yada yada for years in a row))

 
George Merts:

That's right.

If you need a baseline - that's what Equity is at the previous stage. Indeed, a floating non-fixed value. I don't see any "detachment from reality", on the contrary, those who think balance means something are detached from reality. If our Equity is 1000, it makes no difference whether our balance is now 100 or 10K - what matters is Equity in the previous step, whether it was 900 or 1100.


Bringing it to the point of absurdity. A kind of absurdisation by virtualisation. ;)))))

Look around and come down to earth from your virtual clouds.

 
George Merts:

That's right! A perfect example.

If you had a request "I want to see Masha from accounting department, who will tell me why my accounting software shows bullshit" and programmer Pasha comes and explains what is wrong - I would be just as happy if Masha came. Perhaps even more.

Another thing is that you need to ask for the exact interface you need. Of course, if you need sex, and came programmer Pasha instead of Masha - you will not be happy. However, you will immediately see the discrepancy, and still "at compile time" eliminate the mistake.

And if you have access directly to the objects - then having requested Masha for sex - you can get in the face from Masha itself, and then - and from a spouse who came to get Masha.

Virtualization - and allows you to limit your request to exactly what you need at a particular place for a particular action. Everything else is cut off. And it saves you from a lot of possible mistakes. The only limitation, in my opinion, is the "overhead" of designing all those virtual interfaces. If we want to "quickly" check the idea of a simple indicator, it is unreasonable to make all these OOP complexities.


Apparently, it's possible to get hooked on OOP. The symptoms are extreme virtualization, escape from reality, replacement of reality with virtuality.

;)))

 
ivan12347777:

You don't have a basplata grail?) or a working strategy?

No

I removedthe Grails from the marketplace so as not to confuse customers.

I don't want to fool people.

 
Alexey Volchanskiy:

The word "delaying" somehow scares opponents of OOP )))) It's better to use the phrase "introduces a delay".

And now a killer question - what percentage of it? After all, no one tried to make tests, only on the forum blah-blah-blah for years in a row ))

It will depend on the virtualization lovers themselves. If there are many classes, the lag will probably be higher and if only one function is virtual, the lag will be lower.

With respect.

 
George Merts:

О ! At least you can tell me the difference between lock and reopening.

If there are no swaps and the Expert Advisor is trading - there is no difference between locking and re-locking in my opinion.

There is a known difference - it's a second chance

Closing the lock + the main position gives us a better chance for profit if we have a good strategy for opening and closing orders

When closing on a stop loss there is no chance, although sometimes this is the best

In general, if you clearly distinguish a trend from a flat,locking may help you

Reason: