Did Structs Change with the last MT5 Update? - page 6

New comment
 
Dominik Egert #:
Thank you for the confirmation. - You are not interested in a solution, as it seems. I gave you the solution that runs on NYST. But its fine, how could I know, after all, you solved it already. - Or are you just trying to escape payment? :-)
Convince me with a stable solution, not with theory. 
MQL server, C# server, multithreading, queue, sync and async. API ready to integrate. 
 
Doerk Hilger #:

The problem is: Everyone has access to ChatGPT and when you ask it, how to, it comes always with ring-buffer and that stuff. I can ensure you upfront: Its not what will work and also not what you wanna manage later. You will also figure out: Its not what you need, since you update the most of the time, not request.

 
Nonetheless, this is getting offtopic. How bout you open a new thread and show us how you wanna do it. And dont forget: We talk about a server in MQL, not in C#. Your main question should be first: How to feed, to receive and how to avoid blocking. 

>>EDIT3: this method uses only atomic/non-blocking updates to the ring buffer. It will always be at the edge of what's pushable by the CPUs involved.<< will not work in multithreading environment. 
An atomic operation is literally a hardware flag with a pinout on CPUs. Of course it is thread safe.

There have been multiple talks about exactly this method and how to implement them on FPGAs, for exchanges. Its the State-Of-The-Art goto method to solve exactly this task. There is no mathematical or mechanical way to do it better.

How could anyone actually work with you, and not for you.... Innovation only takes place, if you are able to admit, it can be done better.

Have a nice day and leave me be, please.
 
Doerk Hilger #:
Convince me with a stable solution, not with theory. 
MQL server, C# server, multithreading, queue, sync and async. API ready to integrate. 
Sure, and all on the forum for you to copy. Go get a life, or talk to people who know what they are doing.

I literally dont, and I have no idea how to do it, and surely cannot implement it.
 
Dominik Egert #:
An atomic operation is literally a hardware flag with a pinout on CPUs. Of course it is thread safe.

Ever done? The operation itself is, but the code up to that point is not. You never know if another thread is not doing the same thing the same time. You need a mutex or system-wide semaphore around to avoid that risk. 

>>Have a nice day and leave me be, please.<<

I am happy to do so, since many of your replies were personal and provocative, and only about "I know better no matter what you experienced and no matter what your usecase or criteria based on your experience is"

That is clearly "bad design" in view of communication, it's toxic. 

 
Doerk Hilger #:

Ever done? The operation itself is, but the code up to that point is not. You never know if another thread is not doing the same thing the same time. You need a mutex or system-wide semaphore around to avoid that risk. 

>>Have a nice day and leave me be, please.<<

I am happy to do so, since many of your replies were personal and provocative, and only about "I know better no matter what you experienced and no matter what your usecase or criteria based on your experience is"

That is clearly "bad design" in view of communication, it's toxic. 

Why do you insist on being right when you are clearly not. You do not need anything else but an atomic operation to stay in sync. Its all it takes.

Investigate on your own and see, see that I am actually offering you a solution that is battle proof and has been implemented multiple times by various software.

I am simply trying to get something through to you which you keep rejecting.

This is Plato's Cave, you are stuck in. Not me. And I started politely, it is your stubbornness that makes communication with you toxic to a point where, knowing, you still reject, for no reason, and no actual evaluation.

You are the one, not being g able to adapt your thought process to a new approach. That is your flaw, not mine. So stop putting this on me.
 

You are crossing line after line with every posting. 

This is a public forum. Are you aware of what you do with all your personal attacks? 

You should clearly be no moderator here. 

 
Doerk Hilger #:

You are crossing line after line with every posting. 

This is a public forum. Are you aware of what you do with all your personal attacks? 

You should clearly be no moderator here. 

Yeah, so you checked, hmm...

Hard to admit when wrong, isn't it.
 

Luckily Fernando deleted your last postings after this with further personal offenses and humiliations. 

I can just repeat:  

You should clearly be no moderator here. 
 
Doerk Hilger #:

Luckily Fernando deleted your last postings after this with further personal offenses and humiliations. 

I can just repeat:  

You should clearly be no moderator here. 
Yeah, I understand why you are of this opinion. And its fine.

I do admit, taking you down like that was not very nice of me, but necessary, for various reasons. And, no, we will not go into this again.

So, would you now at least consider my proposal? Even if it shows to be false.
 
Dominik Egert #:
Yeah, I understand why you are of this opinion. And its fine.

I do admit, taking you down like that was not very nice of me, but necessary, for various reasons. And, no, we will not go into this again.

So, would you now at least consider my proposal? Even if it shows to be false.

I note your change in tone, but also noticed you mentioned “various reasons” for taking me down.

If there are actual technical reasons, I’m open to hearing them. If it’s just personal, then that’s not productive.

I don’t dismiss ideas, but they need a concrete, working implementation. If you can show a stable solution that matches or outperforms what I’ve built in real-world conditions, I’ll gladly take a serious look. Theory alone doesn’t help anyone.
12345678910
New comment