Validation error when releasing the trading robot to the market. - page 8

New comment
 
I have the same thing(((( what I had the day before yesterday does not go through, and all the previous ones do not go through either....
 
Viktor Barilko:
I have the same thing(((( what went through the day before yesterday doesn't go through, and all the previous ones don't go through either....

Corrected.

 
Anton:

Corrected.

thanks
 
I can't understand it. You've got to be kidding me. It's almost impossible to download updates of EAs on your service. They easily load EAs earlier but have no error messages in the tester, though I don't have such errors during testing. However, if you try to load EAs +100500 times, sometimes your system still misses them. I have to spend a few days just to download important EA updates for my clients
 
Yevhenii Mavletbaiev:
I do not understand. You have to be kidding me. To download updates of EAs on your service is almost impossible. They easily load EAs before, but have no trouble loading them and show errors in the tester, although I don't have such errors during testing. However, if you try to load EAs +100500 times, sometimes your system still misses them. I have to spend a few days just to download important EA updates for my clients


weren't you here back in the day about 5-7 years ago........

Good service, everything is accepted. Yes there are bugs with the tester, on weekends (rests) but in general everything is updated quickly......

 
It's just awful, for days now I've been trying to update an EA which used to load without any problems. It says there are no orders on EURUSD on H1 timeframe, which is absolute nonsense as I have orders in the tester. But just for the sake of interest I built in my code a buy order for this pair and timeframe and it still says there are no orders. This is very annoying. People are waiting for updates but instead of updating the code I'm struggling with how to get around this inadequate validator
 

Dear developers of this service!
We respect you and always give you the details you need to fix your bugs. You always say that it is not possible to identify and fix the bug without reproducing it, and ask us to give you as much detail as possible.

Then why do you disrespect us users so much? Why don't you give us information about where to look for errors, at least approximately?
What can we understand from this autovalidator's report? Where to look for errors?

How can this information be used to find an error?

It's again from the same thread about robots that validated normally before and can't do it now. In addition to that, robot update check for MT4 takes more than an hour and errors have appeared. I have found errors in this article.

Considering that the controversy on this issue has been dragging on for a few years now, it's about time you got it right. Show more information in the autovalidator report, don't mock people, please!

 
Vadim Zotov:

Dear developers of this service!
We respect you and always give you the details you need to fix your bugs. You always say that it is not possible to identify and fix the bug without reproducing it, and ask us to give you as much detail as possible.

Then why do you disrespect us users so much? Why don't you give us information about where to look for errors, at least approximately?
What can we understand from this autovalidator's report? Where to look for errors?



It's again from the same thread about robots that validated normally before and can't do it now. In addition to that, robot update check for MT4 takes more than an hour and errors have appeared. I have found errors in this article.

Considering that the controversy on this issue has been dragging on for a few years now, it's about time you got it right. Show more information in the autovalidator report, don't mock people, please!

The report contains information about the problem, the test takes a very long time, somewhere the code does not exit the loop or every time it sits in the loop for a very long time
 
Denis Nikolaev:
The report contains information about the problem, the test takes a very long time, somewhere the code does not exit the loop or every time it sits in the loop for a very long time

My point is that there is too little information. Every link in the report leads to such a list of possible errors, but no specific error code is given. There are over a hundred possible errors in this list, so the reference to it does not give anything to the programmer in search of an error. Why not specify a particular error code that was encountered during testing? If an error is detected, it means that the validator knows this code. The programmer should show this particular code so that he/she knows what kind of error it is. This will greatly speed up debugging and save the forum from a lot of questions arising from the lack of information.

And we should also provide detailed information on the testing conditions: apart from the symbol and timeframe, we need information about digits of quotes, leverage, base currency and the deposit amount. Without this information you just do not know where to look for the problem when you have a trade but it is not in the validator for some reason.

I have found my mistake, but in such conditions I have to search by iterations and exceptions, which is very inefficient and just takes a lot of effort. By providing detailed information about the testing conditions and the specific error codes recognised, the service will reduce the time spent on programme development, resulting in a win-win situation for everyone.

 
Vadim Zotov:

Why not specify a specific error code that occurred during testing? If an error is recognised, then the validator knows the error code. This specific code should be shown to the programmer so that he/she has an idea of the nature of the error.

The autovalidator does that and in most cases the programmer is told a commonly used error code.

In this case, the test simply hung up before it reached the report generation stage, which is what the programmer was told.

12345678910
New comment