A question for OOP experts. - page 40
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
i doubt there is such a massive demand, imho, human capacity is limited by the daylight hours and the number of adepts who can devote that much time to their development.... in my opinion they are essentially nonexistent, what to do with a bare api? - who will supply the necessary external modules? .... in my opinion without the necessary minimum functionality "out of the box" there will be no demand for such a platform, and a couple of years ago i was paying attention to "ninza", but the principles of strategy testing... don't even want to start, really didn't like
Optimization is not the same, genetics allows you to quickly search through a lot of strategies, i.e. it is the automation of searching for TP
Well, who writes modules for emacs, for example, that turn it into a web browser? https://melpa.org/#/ They didn't turn it into a combine for all occasions there in the basic package, which would look cheap and discouraging.
The basic package is lightweight software, the rest through modules or on its own. Hence the competition, the best module of the like would survive, rather than begging the MC for a new feature for years.
Maybe you could make a signalling service, maybe you could make some money. For me, a clean basic version without the social crap would have been enough.
Well, who writes modules for emacs, for example, that turn it into a web browser at least? https://melpa.org/#/ They didn't turn it into a combine for all occasions in the basic package, which would look cheap and intimidating.
The basic package is lightweight software, the rest through modules or on its own. Hence the competition, the best module out of the similar ones will survive, rather than begging the MC for a new feature for years.
Maybe you could create a signal service, and maybe you could earn money. I would have been satisfied with a pure basic version without the social crap.
The goals are just different, all that concerns trading - someone has to earn at the expense of others.
Who and where can make money in your model? - I have already analyzed this situation, who needs it in your model? - Who needs it?
the goals are simply different, as far as trading is concerned - someone has to earn at the expense of others
In your model, who and where can make money? - One person cannot make money even in the Market, I have already analyzed this situation, in your model? - Who needs it?
Let me speak for myself - I'm not going to write anything. Untrustworthy, fighting code in an external application, so an api would be handy.
As for the harvester that MT has turned into (signals logs market ...) - can you imagine a chef using a Swiss knife? Well here I am looking at it all and am disgusted.
A bonus of api and modular system - alternative terminal components (no one forbids MK to write their own). But fxsaber still makes some tester hacks, maybe he would make his own. How may I earn? Well, I don't know, maybe it's paid, maybe it's donated.
And if no one needs it, all the more so - why be afraid to give an api?
And if no one needs it, all the more so - why be afraid to give an api?
I am not afraid to give an api, but what for? - IT company is making money on its product, if you give an api, will it increase the company's profit in the future or maybe it will change the situation for the worse? - I don't know the answer, but I don't think they will make more money this way.
As for the harvester that MT has become (signals logs market ...) - can you imagine a chef using a Swiss knife? Well here I am looking at it all and feeling disgusted.
that's the tip of the iceberg you see,there are more contests,there are more cold calls to potential clients,there's.... lazy to write, i've been there, i know - target customer base, but does it work? - Clients come and go, interest is stimulated.
what marketplace doesn't do this? - the methods may differ, but in essence, it's like "the wolf of wall street" still works, only the outside has changed.
Well, we are not quite on the same subject - what traders and speculators earn on, but they do not care, what they are given and what they use, but I still believe that it is unreal to promote your model to the masses - there will be very little demand
Igor Makanu:
this is the tip of the iceberg you see, there are more competitions, there are more cold calls to potential clients,
Stop, I'll come out.
Pull over, I'll get out.
Stop, I've got it, get out quick.
Stop it, I'm coming out.
no question, nor am i about forex brokers - 6 years ago it was necessary to put a decent amount in the bank, because it is not reasonable to keep at home, became immediately interested in stockbrokers and those nearby (mutual funds and hz) - i.e. this as you said, "socialism" is everywhere, but under different "ruffles"
OK, let's really get on with it, I wanted to read a book - Hooligan Economics. Financial markets for those who have seen them in the grave, they promised a fascinating read ))))
fxsaber keeps making some tester hacks, maybe he could make his own.
The corresponding toolkit is laid out. No one needs it but the author.
And there is also a need for one. But no one will need it either.
It is the same situation with KB, articles etc.
Developers have introduced custom characters, services, ticks, caches, pips,.... I'm surprised they've done that, as it's only a few, if any, who need it.
Let's take the new pips mode of the tester. Who needs it? -No one in fact! It was born as a vision of a significant algorithmic optimization of the tester on the part of its developers. Who understood its usefulness? -Nobody! And so in everything.
Now the Tester is being significantly modified. But these modifications are of no use to anybody. Well, there are geeks who will appreciate it. In its current form, MT5-Tester is cooler than all its competitors. But for some reason they want to make it even cooler. No one is able to assess its current features, not to mention future ones. The developers are several heads above their users. And clearly the motivation for changes in the Tester is not monetisation (it simply cannot be, if no one understands it), but an internal desire to do something unprecedented.
Shit. Why don't you make an mql analogue of the delegate? Just for fun, for the sake of raising the BSD.
Why make something complicated when it's already simple?