Algorithms, solution methods, comparison of their performance - page 12

[Реter Konow]

Sergey Dzyublik:

1. How many microseconds on average does it take to find the magician in your solution?

2. How easy is it to integrate your solution into the EA (in your opinion)?

[Реter Konow]

Artyom Trishkin:

Personally, I would like Peter to direct his persistence in a different direction - not to start a vegetable garden, and understand what he is offered.

Thank you. Good intentions are always nice.

So, I'm gardening, and you're trying to offer me something. Okay. (chuckles)

And what do you think of the solution that Sergey Dzyublik posted ?

Obviously, this is the style of solution you suggest.

Then would you explain to me:

1. How this solution can be easily and quickly integrated into Expert Advisors?

2. How is it better than my simple solution?

[Vladimir Karputov]

Correct me, but isn't string length finite?

https://msdn.microsoft.com/ru-ru/library/sx08afx2.aspx

I just can't find this limitation for MQL5...

[Artyom Trishkin]

Реter Konow:

Thank you. Good intentions are always nice.

So, I'm gardening, and you're trying to offer me something. Okay. (chuckles)

And what do you think of the solution that Sergey Dzyublik posted ?

Obviously, this is the style of solution you suggest.

Then would you explain to me:

1. How this solution can be easily and quickly integrated into Expert Advisors?

2. How is it better than my simple solution?

No. I'm not offering you a solution style that's not yours. You write in your own style - no one is forcing anything on anyone.

But I suggest that with your characteristic obstinacy you solve problems in the best way from the very beginning. What do you do? You initially choose the most sub-optimal solution of all possible ones, and start playing it around. For this task, even at the stage of thinking out a solution, it was necessary not only to reject your version, but not even to think in that direction - the work with the text is too costly on resources. And that's not what the text handling functions are for.

Concerning the integration into the Expert Advisor and the advantages of the proposed solution - let the one who proposed it answer you.

[Реter Konow]

Artyom Trishkin:

No. I'm not suggesting you have someone else's solution style. Write in your own style - no one is imposing anything on anyone.

But I'm suggesting that with your characteristic tenacity you solve problems in the optimal way from the very beginning. What are you doing?

1. Initially you choose the most suboptimal solution of all possible ones, and start playing around with it. For this task, even at the stage of considering the solution, you should not only discard your version, but not even think in that direction - working with text is too expensive on resources. And that's not what the text handling functions are for.

2. Concerning the integration into the EA and the benefits of the proposed solution, let the one who suggested it answer you.

1. From a practical point of view, these are empty words with which you are fighting the facts. I have shown a measurement of the time to find a magician. I have demonstrated the convenience of integrating the solution into the EA. All you are demonstrating is slander of my solution. Nothing else.

2. integration into EA is the key point. If the solution is super convoluted (I'm sure you can't even explain how Sergey Dzyublik's solution works), what is its practical value to the trader? You can't build a normal EA out of super convoluted solutions.

I don't judge Sergey Dzyublik's solution . He hasn't explained it yet. When he explains it, it will become clear who is doing this.

[fxsaber]

Sergey Dzyublik:

1. For what reason is the style such that interfaces are written first, and only then classes (as descendants of their respective interfaces)?
2. Why is this being done?

// TODO bypass the problem with explicit template specialization
template<typename T>
IGenerator<T>* CreateGenerator(){
   string generatorName = typename(T);
   StringToUpper(generatorName);
   
   if (generatorName == "INT"){
      return new IntGenerator();
   }
    
   return NULL;
}

Obviously they just forgot.

      delete generator;
      
      return TEST_DURATION("GetValue");

Somewhat surprised that it was done via CArrayList rather than using the HashMap just discussed. Shouldn't have been guided by the author's crooked original, where transactions are indexes, not tickets.

HashMap would have been clearer, more practical and faster, most likely.

Surprised myself that such code could be read with ease. However, I haven't reached the abstraction level shown in programming myself yet. My style so far is procedural + OOP. This code is pure OOP. Apparently it is some well-learned programming school. OnlyStanislav Korotky's work on this site has a similar level of abstraction.

[Artyom Trishkin]

Реter Konow:

1. In terms of practice, these are empty words with which you fight the facts. I have shown the time measurement for finding the magician. I have demonstrated the convenience of integrating the solution into the EA. All you are demonstrating is a slander of my solution. Nothing else.

2. integration into EA is the key point. If the solution is super convoluted (I'm sure you can't even explain how Sergey Dzyublik's solution works), what is its practical value to the trader? You can't build a normal EA out of super convoluted solutions.

I don't judge Sergey Dzyublik's solution . He hasn't explained it yet. When he explains it, it will be clear who started this mess.

It's hard to deal with someone who's proud. Too proud.

Maybe I'd better keep quiet - there's a lot of work to be done. I am interested here because the topic raised by Vasily overlaps with the one I am preparing.

And your persistence and pride are yours and no one else is interested.

Would that answer suit you?

[Реter Konow]

Artyom Trishkin:

How hard it is to be with someone who is proud. Too proud.

Perhaps I'd better keep quiet - there's still a lot to do. I am interested here because the topic raised by Vasili strongly overlaps with the one I am preparing.

And your insistence and pride are yours, and no one else is interested.

Will that answer suit you?

Quite. Only pride has nothing to do with it. Self-assertion, maybe.

But it's inherent in everyone.

[Artyom Trishkin]

Реter Konow:

Quite. Only pride has nothing to do with it. Self-assertion maybe.

But that is inherent in everyone.

So far you have asserted yourself as a very strange man. Completely unlearned and totally unaccepting of cues from your peers.

It is inherent in most - to learn throughout life, to gain the right knowledge, to cross out as unnecessary their wrong ones.
It is inherent in most people to realise their mistakes and be grateful for the tips and help they have received. But, alas, not you.

Carry on.

[Реter Konow]

Artyom Trishkin:

So far you have asserted yourself as a very strange person. Completely unlearned and totally unaccepting of cues from fellow workers.

It is inherent in the majority to learn throughout life, to gain the right knowledge, to cross out as unnecessary their wrong ones.
It is inherent in most to realise their mistakes and be grateful for the promptings and help given. But, alas, not you.

Carry on.

There are many dogmas and stereotypical ways of thinking.

I learn differently than you are used to understanding it. I filter knowledge through the prism of my own critical thinking, and in the process, I recognize what is valuable and what is superfluous.

I discard the superfluous. That leaves me with a naked essence, which I accept.

In other words, I "consume" knowledge consciously and fragmentedly, in contrast to those who accept it thoughtlessly and in its entirety.

Knowledge has to pass the filtering of thinking (if it works).

I realise my mistakes as soon as I am convinced of them. So far no one has been able to prove that my decision is wrong. We will wait and see.