
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
The millisecond timer has been around for a long time: EventSetMillisecondTimer()
You are completely out of the loop. Suppose you need to open two positions in OnTick. The first OrderSend is a few milliseconds. After it you need to make a snapshot. And then the second OrderSend should be called.
Only OnTick can be executed for hundreds of milliseconds. And you suggest to snapshot some OnTimer.
There are also issues with the metering library itself. There is a lot of unnecessary stuff, including the overhead.
Arguments in the studio!
Here's my code and stable runtime: no hundreds or thousands of microseconds on 20 graphs in parallel
How many cores do you have and what kind of processor? i7-2600?
8 cores.
Hidden stress test again with millions of requests in parallel?
Told you many times that combat advisor. Minimized the number of calls as much as possible. In theory (I haven't measured it) up to 10 calls per OnTick.
Be more transparent. Just because you posted a couple of simple _B calls is not proof of your other claims. You abruptly forget about the code and the actual description of the conditions as soon as you make outlandish claims.
You don't need to imagine anything in your mind - tell and show what you actually call and test. Not a torn out result of "ran an unknown stress test and waiting for an alert to show the world", but exactly the full code of the test.
I'm publishing the results from the live EA. There are 70 mqh files there, including WinAPI. If you really understand it and not just words, I will give you the source code. You will reproduce the brakes pretty quickly.
You are completely out of the loop. Let's say you need to open two positions in OnTick. The first OrderSend is a few milliseconds. After it you need to make a snapshot. And then the second OrderSend should be called.
Only OnTick can be executed for hundreds of milliseconds. And you suggest to snapshot some OnTimer.
8 cores.
Many times said combat advisor. Minimized the number of calls as much as possible. In theory (I haven't measured it) up to 10 calls per OnTick.
I am publishing the results from the Expert Advisor. There are 70 mqh files there, including WinAPI. If you don't just talk about it, but really understand it, I will give you the source code. You'll play the brakes pretty quickly.
Arguments on the table!
Your whole benchmark is overloaded with rubbish and in fact here is a clean and understandable (unlike your clutter of code) version of it:
What are your problems:
I hope you didn't disable code optimization for tests?
I mean the global parameter Optimize=0 in metaeditor.ini
Your whole benchmark is overloaded with rubbish and in fact here is a clean and understandable (in contrast to your clutter of code) version of it:
Your version is, unfortunately, at the early stage of understanding convenience. Convenient is when you can do it like this.
Forum on trading, automated trading systems and strategy testing
Libraries: Benchmark
fxsaber, 2020.10.01 23:49
Now we try to find out where the hiccup is in the standard variant. We add some symbols to the source code.
And immediately see the reason.
CHART_IS_MAXIMIZED is too slow for someone else's charts. Bug report is ready! It was very easy with the library.
What's the problem:
The usability overrides the meager overhead. It's miserable if you look closely at how it's implemented. For example, ArrayResize is an overhead, so its use is minimized.
I hope you haven't disabled code optimization for tests?
I mean the global parameter Optimize=0 in metaeditor.ini
Not interested in slow modes. I'm looking at combat EA performance, paying attention to algorithmic optimization and compiler optimization as well, of course.
Your whole benchmark is overloaded with rubbish and in fact here is a clean and understandable (unlike your clutter of code) version of it:
What's your problem:
I hope you didn't disable code optimization for tests?
I mean the global parameter Optimize=0 in metaeditor.ini
Here it is C-style, it's simple and really rubbish free. Thanks for the example.
One of C language teachers recommended better not to use underscore _B in user names
Because this prefix is used by developers of libraries, programs, etc.
And not to run into overlap, he recommended better not to use it.
In mql5 is it possible to overlap with your names?
Or custom names are completely shielded from MQ names ?
One of the C teachers recommended not to use the underscore _B in user names
, because this prefix is used by developers of libraries, software, etc.
And to avoid overlap, he recommended not to use it.
In C, names starting with "_" are used as service, system or special names. In this case, I think it's acceptable. Since this function is used for code maintenance and examination.
Names beginning with "_" are used in C as service, system or special names. In this case - acceptable, I think. Since this function is used for code maintenance and examination.
That's the point, besides mql5, there are developer's MQ service names.