My approach. The core is the engine. - page 23
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
Of course there is no problem. And if there were no algotrading per se, there would be no problem either. And the internet and social media...
All of these are contrived entities that create new solutions and new problems. Nobody forbids creating new niches, inventions.
People get used to them and then cannot live without them. That's how it works in life.)
The problem of algotrading, as well as of any niche, is development. Without it, the niche's existence is doomed. The question - where do we need to develop? Only in the direction of manual trading. Only to "absorb" it with semi-automatics. And we will get a new space for our niche, and consequently money and time for the existence of our activity. At the expense of eating another, dead-end niche.
I'm confused. First there is a problem, then you write that there is no problem, then you write that there is a problem.
And in general, you have a strange notion of development of trading. You write that algotrading needs to be developed in the direction of manual trading. Isn't it vice versa? In the beginning there was manual trading, where even the moving averages were calculated using calculators. Then there appeared PCs and trading platforms, in which these indicators were already built into the platform. Then it became possible to code custom indicators and even automate trading systems. It turns out that algotrading is the development of manual trading. And the semi-automatic trading is an intermediate between the manual and automated trading, and when the trading strategy can not be automatized.
I'm confused. First there is a problem, then you write that there is no problem, then you write that there is a problem.
And in general, you have a strange notion of trading development. You write that algotrading needs to move to manual trading. Isn't it vice versa? In the beginning there was manual trading, where even the moving averages were calculated using calculators. Then there appeared PCs and trading platforms, in which these indicators were already built into the platform. Then it became possible to code custom indicators and even automate trading systems. It turns out that algotrading is the development of manual trading. And the semi-automatic trading is an intermediate link between manual and automated trading, and when the trading strategy cannot be algoritized.
Logically, algotrading should have completely eliminated manual trading. But, instead, it began to develop in parallel. The sphere of manual trading was left unconquered. This is a mistake in the development of algotrading. Therefore, for further development manual trading should be replaced by semi-automated trading.
Semi-automatics is an underdeveloped area of algotrading at the moment. And it is designed to absorb manual trading. It is a free space for development. If we do not conquer it, others will. Therefore, we have to move towards manual trading, but only to"conquer" it.
...It turns out that algotrading is a further development of manual trading. And semi-automatic trading is an intermediate link between manual trading and automatic trading, and when the trading strategy does not lend itself to algorithmic trading.
Right. But it is not only a "link". It is a development space. It is money.
Logically, algotrading should have completely superseded manual trading. But, instead, it began to develop in parallel. The sphere of manual trading was left unconquered. This is a mistake in the development of algotrading. Therefore, for further development manual trading should be replaced by semi-automated trading.
Semi-automatics is the unconquered area of algotrading at the moment. And it is designed to absorb manual trading. This is a free space for development. If we do not conquer it, others will. Therefore, you have to move in the direction of manual trading, but only to"conquer" it.
Ah, that's what you mean. I misunderstood your point at first. You suggest to squeeze out manual trading by replacing it with semi-automated trading. But creating an interface that only opens positions and sets TP and SL levels is not enough. You need to include analysis elements into such an interface. This is what is meant by semi-automated trading. A robot analyzes the market situation, but the decision to open (or close) a position is made by the trader. And then we get back to the issue of creating a trading system. And if your interface provides only buttons to open (close) a position without analyzing the market, it's not a semi-automatic trading system, but it's fully manual, not through the terminal interface, but through the "Expert Advisor".
Oh, that's what you mean. I misunderstood your point at first. You propose to squeeze out manual trading by replacing it with semi-automatic trading. But creating an interface with the help of which only positions are opened and TP and SL levels are set is not enough. You need to include analysis elements into such an interface. This is what is meant by semi-automated trading. A robot analyzes the market situation, but the decision to open (or close) a position is made by the trader. And then we get back to the issue of creating a trading system. And if your interface provides only buttons to open (close) without analyzing the market, it's not a semi-automatic trading system, but fully manual trading only through an interface of the terminal, but through the "intermediary" one.
Well, my interface offers more than just "open/close" buttons :)
No semi-automation will work without a GUI.
Therefore, I created one. However, further development of semi-automation will depend on the smartest and shrewdest developers to take the tools offered and make semi-automated solutions for "manual" tasks.
I have opened the door to a new field, and it will be conquered on the MT platform, by the developers in our community.
By the way, I suggested this a long time ago, but nobody understood me.)
Well, my GUI offers more than just open/close buttons :)
No semi-automation will work without a GUI.
Therefore, I have created one. However, the further development of semi-automatics will depend on the smartest and shrewdest developers to take the tools offered and make semi-automated solutions for "manual" tasks.
I have opened the door to a new field, and it will be conquered on the MT platform, by the developers in our community.
By the way, I suggested this a long time ago, but nobody understood me:))
I see. But except that your style of programming does not meet modern preferences, and I'm afraid that pragmatic programmers would prefer to use for this purpose ready and more convenient classes, included into standard delivery set of the platform. Otherwise, instead of spending more time on implementing the market analysis algorithm, they will have to deal with the intricacies of your code.
I see. But your programming style doesn't meet modern preferences, and I'm afraid that pragmatic programmers will prefer to use ready-made and more convenient classes included into the standard delivery set of the platform for these purposes. Otherwise, instead of spending more time on implementing the algorithm of market analysis, they will have to sort out the intricacies of your code.
You are wrong.
I will explain why:
Programmers will not need to look through the code of my solutions. They will get a graphical constructor and create the interface of their applications. This interface will be carried by a special program called "engine". This "engine" will connect to the developer's application and interact with it as one unit.That is, the application GUI is carried by a special program which is connected to the application itself.
This has already been tested and works. (Oleg Papkov was the pioneer of this technology).
You are wrong.
Let me explain why:
Programmers will not need to look at the code of my solutions. They will get a graphical designer and create an interface for their applications. This interface will be carried by a special program called "engine". This "engine" will connect to the developer's application and interact with it as one unit.That is, the application GUI is carried by a special program which is connected to the application itself.
This has already been tested and works. (Oleg Papkov was the pioneer of this technology).
So it will be possible to attach a market analysis unit to it without any modifications?
So it will be possible to attach a market analysis unit to it without any modifications?
Right.
The engine carrying the application GUI, simply performs the mechanics of the controls (buttons, input fields, etc...).
Button presses, checkboxes, text input and other user actions, direct from are passed to the developer application.
The application can transfer its data to fields and tables.
Everything is done through a simple connection file.
NET-dlls are now coming to MT. It is no longer difficult to make a GUI in C-sharp for MT, and with more functionality. And since in any case all events are on MT-ticks, then the buttons, too. Well, analysis screw, imho, easier to DLL than to Peter.
In general, the engine Peter, if anyone useful, it is only Market-sellers, where DLL nizzo.