The ticking history of the glass. - page 10

New comment
 

As you know a tick flag can be a combination of:

  • TICK_FLAG_BID - tick changed price bid
  • TICK_FLAG_ASK - tick has changed the ask price
  • TICK_FLAG_LAST - tick changed price of last deal
  • TICK_FLAG_VOLUME - Tick has changed volume
  • TICK_FLAG_BUY - Tick occurred as a result of a buy deal
  • TICK_FLAG_SELL - the tick occurred as a result of a sell deal

However, it seems to me that these are only flags that the developers considered necessary to describe in the documentation.

I actually encountered values of 0x158 (344) which cannot be a combination of only those described.

-TICK_FLAG_BID - tick has changed a Bid price 2 0x2

-TICK_FLAG_ASK - a tick has changed an Ask price 4 0x4

-TICK_FLAG_LAST - a tick has changed the last deal price 8 0x8

-TICK_FLAG_VOLUME - a tick has changed a volume 16 0x10

-TICK_FLAG_BUY - a tick is a result of a buy deal 32 0x20

-TICK_FLAG_SELL - a tick is a result of a sell deal 64 0x40

Who has the information - please share.


 
Mikhail Dovbakh:

As you know a tick flag can be a combination of:

  • TICK_FLAG_BID - tick changed price bid
  • TICK_FLAG_ASK - tick has changed the ask price
  • TICK_FLAG_LAST - tick changed price of last deal
  • TICK_FLAG_VOLUME - Tick has changed volume
  • TICK_FLAG_BUY - Tick occurred as a result of a buy deal
  • TICK_FLAG_SELL - the tick occurred as a result of a sell deal

However, it seems to me that these are only flags that the developers considered necessary to describe in the documentation.

I actually encountered values of 0x158 (344) which cannot be a combination of only those described.

-TICK_FLAG_BID - tick has changed a Bid price 2 0x2

-TICK_FLAG_ASK - a tick has changed an Ask price 4 0x4

-TICK_FLAG_LAST - a tick has changed the last deal price 8 0x8

-TICK_FLAG_VOLUME - a tick has changed a volume 16 0x10

-TICK_FLAG_BUY - a tick is a result of a buy deal 32 0x20

-TICK_FLAG_SELL - a tick is a result of a sell deal 64 0x40

Who has the information - please, share.


What market?

 
Open-Demo fuch Eu-6.19


By RTS-6.19 more often flag 0x138 (312)


 
Mikhail Dovbakh:
Open-Demo fuch Eu-6.19

Strange.

1. The demo shouldn't work today.

2. Indeed, the developers haven't defined everything, because the glass is triggered when the pending

order is not in the first line.

Added

Are you sure that the constants have these exact values?

 
I analyse history.
 
prostotrader:

Are you sure the constants have these exact values?

Print them out yourself - no big deal)

 
Mikhail Dovbakh:

Print it yourself, that's all.)

Yeah, I printed it out, very strange indeed.

Eu-6.19 is 344.

 

Ran this code on a realEu-6.19

int OnInit()
  {
  MqlTick ticks[];
  datetime s_time = TimeTradeServer();
  ulong a_time = ulong(s_time) - 72* 3600;
  int res = CopyTicksRange(Symbol(), ticks, COPY_TICKS_ALL, a_time * 1000, ulong(s_time) * 1000);
  if(res > 0)
  {
    for(int i = 0; i<res;i++)
    {
      Print(ticks[i].flags);
    } 
  }
   return(INIT_SUCCEEDED);
  }

And, much rarer but still have 344 and 312 :(

Added

It never happened before, maybe developers added something (new constants)

Or maybe there is rubbish in high bits in the buffer

 
prostotrader:

Ran this code on a realEu-6.19

And, much rarer but still have 344 and 312 :(

Added

This was not before, apparently the developers have added something (new constants)

What I wanted to know - whether it's a sign of some clearing, and whether it is possible to use tics with flag 0x100?

Are they not service?

 
Mikhail Dovbakh:

What I wanted to know is if this is a sign of some kind of clearing, And can I use ticks with the flag 0x100?

Aren't they service ones?

100% no.

1...34567891011121314151617
New comment