Discussion of article "MQL5 vs QLUA - Why trading operations in MQL5 are up to 28 times faster?" - page 7

New comment
 
s_mike:
If the speed of calculations is required, a module can be written in the same Visual Studio, to which all the necessary raw data is passed and processing is done inside this module).

Please rewrite the lua-sources from the article to the optimal form, as it seems.

 
fxsaber:

Please rewrite the lua sources from the article to the optimal form, as it is seen.

If this work will be paid - my mail is available in my profile.
 
s_mike:
If this work will be paid - my mail is available in my profile.

I am not ready to pay for confirmation of the correctness of your public statements.

 
s_mike:
Renate.

Why are you so excited? Hit a sore spot? You'll have to forgive me, couch warrior)))

Regarding my person:
I have written enough letters in files with the extension .lua and .mq5. I have written more letters in lua than you have. By orders of magnitude.

And if I assert that your programming style in lua is amateurish, it means that there are grounds for it.


You should first prove your words with your code as opposed to our proofs.

Why are you throwing words around on the level of banal erudition and without knowing what LUA is?


Now to the point.

I repeat. If you need the speed of calculations, you can simply write a module in the same Visual Studio, to which all the necessary raw data is transferred and the processing goes inside this module). Google will help you find examples of such ready modules, including very popular ones.

There are two languages that have been compared.

And one loses to the other in 50-600 times in terms of speed, and in conjunction with a trading platform on pure trading transactions, where the minimum language bundling in 28 times.

Quick itself has no deep integration with the language, which is just tacked on the side. And MetaTrader 5 is built around meeting the needs of MQL5, when all the data is ready to be used in MQL5. Moreover, the LUA language was created as a binding between high-level calls, but not for calculation operations.


Write modules in C++ and then distribute them? Who will risk installing someone else's EXE/DLL in the trading environment?

But in MQL5 it is safe, because in MQL5 you get a safe code and almost the same speed as in C++.


What kind of huge arrays do you need to bullet from Lua into C++ module? Stop fantasising. A unit of data is a table of a dozen short fields. It costs 0 milliseconds to transfer them to the module through a lua api pseudo-stack.

Those who live in Quick don't know the concept of real data.

When you can repeat the following code in LUA, come back to discuss "huge arrays":

void OnStart()
  {
   MqlTick  arr_ticks[];
   MqlRates arr_rates[];
   ulong    ticks      =GetMicrosecondCount();
   int      ticks_total=CopyTicks("RTS-9.17",arr_ticks,COPY_TICKS_ALL,0,100000000);
   int      rates_total=CopyRates("RTS-9.17",PERIOD_M1,0,100000000,arr_rates);
//---
   Print("Time: ",GetMicrosecondCount()-ticks," msc for ",ticks_total," ticks and ",rates_total," bars");
  }


test (RTS-9.17,M1)	Time: 2 616 700 msc for 17 971 585 ticks and 60 278 bars

Running cold, 17 million real RTS-9.17 ticks and 60,278 minute bars were produced in 2.6 seconds.

Unlimited data limits are used within the platform. This data is used for building indicators, analyses, etc.

This is exactly the data that MQL programmes operate with. And the terminal itself operates with such data in its work.


And you are talking about some tables. The statement about "It costs 0 milliseconds to transfer them to the module through the pseudo-stack of lua api" shows that you have no idea about real costs. Pour at least a million records from Quick into a Lua array, and then work with it. 0 milliseconds it has....


All the nonsense about taking me outside of trading and other if/else wrappings is for a psychiatrist.

You just don't know the language and its inner workings. That's why all languages are the same for you.

Do you even realise that you are talking to a person who creates programming languages and fights for efficiency and productivity?

 
Renat Fatkhullin:

You first prove your words with your code as opposed to our proofs.

Why are you throwing words around on the level of banal erudition and not knowing what LUA is?


There are two languages that have been compared.

And one loses to the other in 50-600 times in terms of speed, and in conjunction with a trading platform on pure trading transactions, where the minimum of language wrapping in 28 times.

Quick itself has no deep integration with the language, which is just tacked on the side. And MetaTrader 5 is built around meeting the needs of MQL5, when all the data is ready to be used in MQL5. Moreover, the LUA language was created as a binding between high-level calls, but not for calculation operations.


Write modules in C++ and then distribute them? Who will risk installing someone else's EXE/DLL in the trading environment?

But in MQL5 it is safe, because in MQL5 you get a safe code and almost the same speed as in C++.


Those who live in Quick do not know the concepts of real data.

When you can repeat the following code in LUA, come back to discuss "huge arrays":

Running cold, 17 million real RTS-9.17 ticks and 60,278 minute bars were produced in 2.6 seconds.

Unlimited data limits are used within the platform. This data is used for building indicators, analyses, etc.

This is exactly the data that MQL programmes operate with. And the terminal itself operates with such data in its work.

And you are talking about some tables.


You just do not know the language and its insides. That's why all languages are the same for you.

Do you realise that you are talking to a person who creates programming languages and fights for efficiency and productivity?

Do you realise who you are talking to?

When you were not even in the plans, the person you are talking to sported ansi C vax compiler on pdp-11.

I can't help myself: sheep.

You are paid money for writing all these tests and blowing snot in the ears of unsophisticated users. I will not write texts and participate in this show for free. 600 times faster. Hands wide, hands wide.

The fact that the loupe support is attached to the terminal on the side is right. It should be so (though we cannot say that the developers of Quick planned it: they had no other way). And the way your company is going - everything should be colourful, blinking, and closed in one ball - is doubtful. And the main thing - ponts, ponts...

"We wrote a tester, now you don't need amibroker and welslab." 600 times faster, too? Clowns.

"We can send 28 times more transactions than Quick. What the fuck for? For.
There's fix, it's also 28 times faster.

We can add 1+1 100 times faster. Even if that's the case (and it's not) why? Infrastructure bandwidth is still the determining factor. Do you drive a Ferrari faster from Khimki to Vidnoye than a Solaris?

All this is bubbles and chatter. PR to attract suckers. That's your target audience, though.



Block me already. Poetry writers.
 

I guess you're too old to compete. Words don't win here.

Godspeed.

 

Shit, what does it matter how many times faster? !!!!

On FORTS, for example, for one login 30 transactions per second!!!!

It doesn't matter what MT5, what KVIC + brokers' networks leave much to be desired!

But what does not matter is the possibility of FULL-fledged trading on the exchange - Options + Futures + Currency + Spot!!!!.

There is not a single software on the market for full-fledged exchange trading by robots (LUA, QLUA - JUST BAD)!

 
prostotrader:

Shit, what does it matter how many times faster? !!!!

On FORTS, for example, for one login 30 transactions per second!!!

Brokerage gateways have higher limits.

Even one broker's client can receive more than 30 transactions per second through MetaTrader 5. But it is clear that they will tolerate it up to some point.


Unfortunately, the Russian exchange cannot or does not want to radically upgrade and unify its system. Hence the dismal situation with trading technologies in the Russian sector for 20 years - no one wants to invest there.

 
prostotrader:

Shit, what does it matter how many times faster? !!!!

On FORTS, for example, for one login 30 transactions per second!!!

You can get up to 600 for an extra fee)))

1234567
New comment