DislikedHi As this is a Sell only system, so once sell arrow appears you open sell trade at open of next candle?Ignored
Regard NOOR16
- #56
- Edited Jan 13, 2018 2:09pm Jan 12, 2018 6:33pm | Edited Jan 13, 2018 2:09pm
Hi,
in the cross.ex4 indicator there is a funny mistake and seems to be written by an inexperienced programmer. Have a look at the source and notice the lines:
where ___Previous is addressed with the index i-1, where it should be i+1. i-1 is the future next bar, so the results are very nice
A pity it does not work this way; an indicator that has knowledge of the future...always wins. When theses lines are changed to correct this, the results are very different.
I am not allowed to post anymore, for Noor16 put me on ignore and blocked me because of this. I can still edit this post thought. I have 15+ years of .mq4 programming experience, I show you the lines where the flaw is, and explain why there is a problem with this. A favor to this thread, I would say.
Update 12/1 19:22; Being a dissident, I will continue to give my feedback here. Now in post #64 the "Wave_Dots" indicator is added. I checked the code, just like with "cross". This indicator is basically flawed as well. This is not about how to trade, or how to use an indicator! BOTH indicator use FUTURE bars to base their decisions on. How do you like that! Just to check if anyone can get reasonable here
For anyone interested:
see the "SH=0;SH<=NB;SH++"? this is where the indicator moves through the individual bars on the chart. But, which is very important here...from the freshest bar, back. Then behold, the magic of this indi: the if() with && UD!=SH_BUY as a condition? In the line that follows this condition is set: UD=SH_BUY;
The point is, if you make an indi move back in time, from bars that in real-time the indi wouldn't know about, it may take the future into account for calculating the past. No indi can do that in real time, right? Hence the difference and a gruesome state of repaint. But some people prefer their illusions above reason, which is great, if you have other goals than working with legitimate indicators. A well coded indicator (mLaden e.a. for instance, many a magnificent original), has one simple rule: always do your loops in the same directions as the bars develop, Which would translate here into:
try it out if you dare! You have the .mq4 and the editor! The results will differ, just because of this....it walks the talk 
in the cross.ex4 indicator there is a funny mistake and seems to be written by an inexperienced programmer. Have a look at the source and notice the lines:
Inserted Code
double iMaSlowPrevious = iMA(NULL,0,SlowPeriod,0,MODE_EMA, PRICE_CLOSE, i-1); double iMaSlowCurrent = iMA(NULL,0,SlowPeriod,0,MODE_EMA, PRICE_CLOSE, i); double iMaFastPrevious = iMA(NULL,0,FastPeriod,0,MODE_EMA, PRICE_CLOSE, i-1); double iMaFastCurrent = iMA(NULL,0,FastPeriod,0,MODE_EMA, PRICE_CLOSE, i);
where ___Previous is addressed with the index i-1, where it should be i+1. i-1 is the future next bar, so the results are very nice
A pity it does not work this way; an indicator that has knowledge of the future...always wins. When theses lines are changed to correct this, the results are very different.I am not allowed to post anymore, for Noor16 put me on ignore and blocked me because of this. I can still edit this post thought. I have 15+ years of .mq4 programming experience, I show you the lines where the flaw is, and explain why there is a problem with this. A favor to this thread, I would say.
Update 12/1 19:22; Being a dissident, I will continue to give my feedback here. Now in post #64 the "Wave_Dots" indicator is added. I checked the code, just like with "cross". This indicator is basically flawed as well. This is not about how to trade, or how to use an indicator! BOTH indicator use FUTURE bars to base their decisions on. How do you like that! Just to check if anyone can get reasonable here
For anyone interested:
Inserted Code
for (SH=0;SH<=NB;SH++)//comb out the chart from 1 to NB
{
for (R=0,i=SH;i<SH+10;i++) {R+=(10+SH-i)*(High[i]-Low[i]);} R/=55;
SHMax = High[Highest(NULL,0,MODE_HIGH,Per,SH)];
SHMin = Low[Lowest(NULL,0,MODE_LOW,Per,SH)];
if (Close[SH]>SHMax-(SHMax-SHMin)*Otstup/100 && UD!=SH_BUY) { BufD[SH]=High[SH]+R*0.5;
if (Close[SH]>SHMax-(SHMax-SHMin)*Otstup/100 && UD!=SH_BUY) UD=SH_BUY;
if (Close[SH]>SHMax-(SHMax-SHMin)*Otstup/100 && UD!=SH_BUY) y=0;//x=x+1;
}
else
if (Close[SH]<SHMin+(SHMax-SHMin)*Otstup/100 && UD!=SH_SELL) { BufU[SH]=Low[SH]-R*0.5;
if (Close[SH]<SHMin+(SHMax-SHMin)*Otstup/100 && UD!=SH_SELL)UD=SH_SELL;
if (Close[SH]<SHMin+(SHMax-SHMin)*Otstup/100 && UD!=SH_SELL) x=0;//y=y+1;
}
} The point is, if you make an indi move back in time, from bars that in real-time the indi wouldn't know about, it may take the future into account for calculating the past. No indi can do that in real time, right? Hence the difference and a gruesome state of repaint. But some people prefer their illusions above reason, which is great, if you have other goals than working with legitimate indicators. A well coded indicator (mLaden e.a. for instance, many a magnificent original), has one simple rule: always do your loops in the same directions as the bars develop, Which would translate here into:
Inserted Code
for (SH=NB;SH>=0;SH--)
- View Post
- Disliked by Thread Starter
- View Post
- Disliked by Thread Starter