A question for OOP experts. - page 55
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
Is that...? The age of liquid computers is just around the corner. You need a more powerful processor? - I spiked the blue liquid. Need more memory? - More blue liquid. And then it will come to gaseous. Then there will be the era of self-organizing nanodust - it will read your mind and do everything you think of.
...
You are being ironic. How, for example, is your"trade object" different from a control? By the number, type and relationship of properties? Yes. But it's just a structural difference, not a fundamental one. Both objects are described by properties and parameters that are in specified numerical ranges and there are relationships and dependencies between their components. Both interact with the "outside world". Do you think they cannot be generalized and modeled in the same environment? It all depends on the representation system. Any objects are represented by an object philosophy, and in a computer they are represented by zeros and ones, which means - they are all from the same "test".
You are being ironic. How, for example, is your"trade object" different from a control? By the number, type and relationship of properties? Yes, but it's only a structural difference, not a fundamental one. Both objects are described by properties and parameters that are in specified numerical ranges and there are relationships and dependencies between their components. Both interact with the "outside world". Do you think they cannot be generalized and modeled in the same environment? It all depends on the representation system. Any objects are represented by an object philosophy, and in a computer they are represented by zeros and ones, which means - they are all from the same "test".
Peter, as you may have noticed long ago, I understand all this very well. But it's my human nature - I'm a huckster by nature. Moderator duties require me to be serious...
Ahh :))) T9 wrote 'lokhmach' instead of 'hokhmach' :))
I'll sell 100 grams of blue for the price of blue. I can get violet, but in very limited quantities, at infra-red prices, and only by pre-order.
They're on their way to pick you up the stairs.
The code is not portable, so that's what makes it special. It is not intended to be portable. It has another purpose. Well, the global scope of variables is a powerful tool for working with complex mechanisms. You just need to know how to use it. When people tell me about hidden errors and bugs, I get confused. I never had any bugs related to global variable visibility. In a word, not at all.
I'm not a programmer, but it would be good to have a standard in the language, because if you ask 10 different people, you'll get 10 different answers, if you could write a language, it's easy to debug, everyone knows what you're talking about, etc. ..
How easy it would be, I'm not right, not to mention OOP, it would be so easy if there was only one way to go when writing an EA.