|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Phsst,
As far as rebuffs go I'm not usually the first one to rebuff or be
confrontational unless you consider my original posts in that class.
However I have no problem stepping up to that plate after I have been
rebuffed.
I thought I asked a simple straigtforward question ...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/message/38785
>From which I got this response which ignored the question ...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/message/38787
To which I again asked a question with the appropriate PLEASE in
it ...
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/message/38790
Following which I get silly comments like well if I only knew a
little C/C++ or something about signal processing ... When for all
anyone knows I could have worked as a DSP engineer in the early to
mid 70's down the road at Bell Labs with Denis Ritchie when and where
C was developed. Not only is this totally inappropriate, it also
totally irrelevant to the origianl question of HOW DOES IT WORK ?
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "phsst" <phsst@xxxx> wrote:
> Fred,
>
> You surely rank among the most confrontational fellas I've ever met.
> (That doesn't mean that you are either alone (or the best)! <g>)
>
> From my perspective, TJ is providing a heck of a powerful software
> package for a reasonable price. If you don't object to a slight
> rebuff... ease up a bit.
>
> Like you, I am an old time software developer and I can validate
just
> about everything about how Amibroker works. And if you find
something
> that doesn't make sense, then report it as a bug, not as a public
rebuff.
>
> Finally, if you prefer to spend $999 or $9999 then go elsewhere and
> see what you get for you money.
>
> From my perspective, most Amibroker customer know very well the
> vulnerablities of AB, and are willing to 'deal with it' until each
> issue is ultimately addressed.
>
> Phsst
>
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Fred" <fctonetti@xxxx> wrote:
> > Tomasz,
> >
> > I'm sure you know what all these things are but I thought this
was a
> > discussion board, nothing more nothing less, I didn't think this
was
> > where people put in requests for enhancements as there are
specific
> > places for that.
> >
> > I never complained about for/while/if/else but when you refer to
one
> > part of my comment as if it was the whole comment and state that
AB
> > does this, that or the other this is highly misleading.
> >
> > If you think I am a constant complainer I will only state that I
am
> > asking about the same types of things now that I asked about on
day 2
> > of using this product which is that before one can use a variety
of
> > indicators one has to test them because one can not see the
coding
> > for them and as such no faith can be given to them without
comparing
> > the results to known calculations and as witnessed by previous
posts
> > today it is only just now that it was discovered that there are
> > apparently problems in how HHV / LLV / HHVBars / LLVBars work
after
> > being assured several times that they had the capability of
variable
> > periodicity. If this particular aspect of these indicators don't
> > work and you don't want to make them do that then don't or save
it
> > for later. Whether or not one considers there to be bugs in how
most
> > of the smoothing indicators work really doesn't matter because
users
> > do not know what to expect for results from these indicators as
most
> > of these are not calculated how one might expect that they were
and
> > there is no documentation that says how they are and there is no
way
> > to duplicate the results.
> >
> > Regarding #INCLUDE maybe I'm missing the power of this that you
> > suggest but I don't see the value of a preprocessor per se.
> >
> > Regarding the $99 fee, I and some others who use this product for
> > system development trade large sums of money with the results of
> > system development from this product and would at a bare minimum
at
> > least like to see it perform as described. To do otherwise
and/or
> > not be aware of calulcations are performed internally is
foolhardy.
> > If that can't be done for $99 then I suggest charging $999 or
$9999
> > for it, take a few days off a week and hire some additional
people to
> > d the grunt work and reserve the project management pieces for
> > yourself.
> >
> > Fred
> >
> > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Tomasz Janeczko"
<amibroker@xxxx>
> > wrote:
> > > Fred,
> > >
> > > I wonder if you really think that I don't know what
> > > are the weaknesses of #include ?
> > >
> > > And that I don't know what functions are ?
> > >
> > > And that I don't know what is structural programming?
> > >
> > > If you knew C/C++ a little you would know that #include is
> > > a PREPROCESSOR command not really a function or statement of
the
> > language.
> > >
> > > The #include is powerful tool but it has no relation to
functions.
> > It is preprocessor
> > > command. And exactly the same it functions in AFL.
> > >
> > > As for "I would like to have" part....
> > > I also would like to have some things (especially for $99)
> > > the problem is that someone has to write it ... and this is me.
> > > I know exactly what should be added,
> > > the problem is that it is HUGE AMOUNT OF WORK that can not be
done
> > > in minutes, hours or days.
> > >
> > > And I am working, 7 days a week (do you work also that
much ???? )
> > > I am bringing new releases almost every week... so please
> > > show just a little, little bit of patience.
> > >
> > >
> > > I am pretty amazed when people are coming from other platforms
> > > like Tradestation and expect me to do in a week/month
> > > things that Tradestation developers TEAM
> > > (many people) NEVER IMPLEMENTED till now and have it all as a
free
> > > upgrade of $99 product.
> > >
> > > Then when given feature arrives (see looping) I hear:
> > > well it is complicated to use and finally only a few use such
> > feature.
> > >
> > > A non-stop complainers are never happy.
> > >
> > > Best regards,
> > > Tomasz Janeczko
> > > amibroker.com
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Fred" <fctonetti@xxxx>
> > > To: <amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Saturday, April 26, 2003 12:13 AM
> > > Subject: [amibroker] Re: Poll results for amibroker &
versatility
> > >
> > >
> > > > Tomasz,
> > > >
> > > > No offense but the #INCLUDE capability as designed and
> > implemented in
> > > > AB/AFL really accomplishes nothing other than to slow things
> > down.
> > > > It does NOT provide modularity of functions that can be used
in a
> > > > generic way from one system/indicator to another nor can
> > #INCLUDES be
> > > > nested, nor can arrays & variables be passed and returned
etc.
> > etc.
> > > > It's structures like these that provide the basic building
blocks
> > > > that allow users to write systems and indicators using
functions
> > that
> > > > have either been included with the product or individually
> > developed
> > > > without having to replicate code.
> > > >
> > > > I would like to have portfolio trading capabilities and all
the
> > rest
> > > > of the stuff that folks have asked for but IMHO also think it
> > highly
> > > > important that issues like this be addressed.
> > > >
> > > > Fred
> > > >
> > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Tomasz Janeczko"
> > <amibroker@xxxx>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > John,
> > > > >
> > > > > Metastock allows to execute formula by name.
> > > > > Equivalent functionality is provided by AFL #include
> > > > >
> > > > > Fred is writing about real functions with param passing by
> > value.
> > > > > This is different story.
> > > > >
> > > > > As to point 3. from Fred's e-mail - it is already possible
> > > > > to have as many #includes in one AFL as you like.
> > > > >
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Tomasz Janeczko
> > > > > amibroker.com
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "John R" <jr-ta@xxxx>
> > > > > To: <amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 11:29 PM
> > > > > Subject: Re: [amibroker] Poll results for amibroker &
> > versatility
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > Fred,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your comments about the importance of getting the basic
> > language
> > > > building
> > > > > > blocks right is spot on IMO. Procedure/function calling
> > > > facilities are
> > > > > > pretty essential for any programming language. Even good
old
> > > > Metastock
> > > > > > allows you to call external formulas!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > John
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ----- Original message -----
> > > > > > From: "Fred Tonetti" <ftonetti@xxxx>
> > > > > > To: <amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Sent: Friday, April 25, 2003 1:59 PM
> > > > > > Subject: RE: [amibroker] Poll results for amibroker &
> > versatility
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Herman,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would agree that it's about tools more than
indicators
> > per se.
> > > > > > > However I consider flexibility in tools to be of
premier
> > > > importance and
> > > > > > > although I didn't vote in the poll I do consider as
part of
> > this
> > > > > > > flexibility having available, variable periodicity
> > > > in "indicators"
> > > > > > > and/or "functions" especially ones that are a pain to
code
> > like
> > > > Linear
> > > > > > > Regression and Standard Deviation etc. and especially
given
> > that
> > > > > > > #INCLUDE (Reusable generic subroutines and/or
functions)
> > > > doesn't have
> > > > > > > the needed functionality, does not always work as
expected
> > and
> > > > is piggy.
> > > > > > > I was interested to see that these in particular made
the
> > top
> > > > of the
> > > > > > > list but why StochK/D did is beyond me since those are
> > easily
> > > > enough
> > > > > > > written in straight AFL with no for loops, not that
> > > > for/while/if/else
> > > > > > > are difficult to use but they're piggy as is #INCLUDE.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For development of any product like AB IMHO it's the
> > building
> > > > blocks
> > > > > > > that are important and the ones that allow users to
make
> > their
> > > > own
> > > > > > > building blocks are that much more important. A good
> > example
> > > > of this is
> > > > > > > #INCLUDE which to me to be usable needs have the
following
> > > > associated
> > > > > > > features.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1. Arguments (Arrays or Variables) for calculation
should
> > be
> > > > able to be
> > > > > > > passed to an #INCLUDE and results returned much like
one
> > can
> > > > with the
> > > > > > > AFL imbedded indicators.
> > > > > > > 2. One should be able to call the same #INCLUDE from
> > different
> > > > places
> > > > > > > in a piece of AFL passing it different arguments and
> > getting
> > > > different
> > > > > > > results without it getting confused.
> > > > > > > 3. One should be able to have multiple #INCLUDE's in a
> > piece
> > > > of AFL.
> > > > > > > 4. One #INCLUDE should be able to have it's own
#INCLUDE's
> > > > > > > 5. It should run just as fast as any other piece of
AFL.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > So as a simple example if one wanted to have their own
> > FastK
> > > > type
> > > > > > > stochastic with variable periodicity that one could use
> > > > whenever one
> > > > > > > wanted with whatever inputs one wanted then one should
be
> > able
> > > > to use it
> > > > > > > and write it in some way like this:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Main AFL ...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > #INCLUDE "C:\...\FastK.AFL" Array1 Array2 Array3 Array4
> > Array5
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Include AFL ...
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > HH = HHV(Array1, Array4);
> > > > > > > LL = LLV(Array2, Array4);
> > > > > > > Array5 = 100 * (Array3 - Array2) / (HH - LL);
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Having the capability of simple building blocks like
this
> > > > allows for
> > > > > > > rapid development of ones own indicators and systems
> > without
> > > > the need
> > > > > > > for repetitive coding .
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For example in TradeStation ALL functions are viewable
as
> > > > EasyLanguage (
> > > > > > > The equivalent to AFL ) even the ones that are imbedded
> > with
> > > > the product
> > > > > > > so there is never a need to guess how something is
> > calculated.
> > > > For
> > > > > > > example here's a standard deviation function . which in
> > turn
> > > > calls an
> > > > > > > Average function. This may not be the most efficient
way
> > to
> > > > write these
> > > > > > > but they illustrate the point.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> >
{*******************************************************************
> > > > > > > Description: Standard Deviation
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> >
********************************************************************}
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Inputs: Price(NumericSeries), Length(NumericSimple);
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Vars: SumSqr(0), Avg(0), Counter(0);
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If Length <> 0 Then
> > > > > > > Begin
> > > > > > > Avg = Average(Price, Length);
> > > > > > > SumSqr = 0;
> > > > > > > For Counter = 0 To Length - 1
> > > > > > > Begin
> > > > > > > SumSqr = SumSqr + (Price[Counter] - Avg)
> > > > > > > * (Price[Counter] - Avg);
> > > > > > > End;
> > > > > > > _StdDev = SquareRoot(SumSqr / Length);
> > > > > > > End
> > > > > > > Else
> > > > > > > _StdDev = 0;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> >
{*******************************************************************
> > > > > > > Description: Simple Moving Average
> > > > > > >
> > > >
> >
********************************************************************}
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Inputs: Price(NumericSeries), Length(NumericSimple);
> > > > > > > Variables: Sum(0), Counter(0);
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Sum = 0;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For counter = 0 To Length - 1 Begin
> > > > > > > Sum = Sum + Price[counter];
> > > > > > > End;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > If Length > 0 Then
> > > > > > > Average = Sum / Length
> > > > > > > Else
> > > > > > > Average = 0;
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Send BUG REPORTS to bugs@xxxx
> > > > > > Send SUGGESTIONS to suggest@xxxx
> > > > > > -----------------------------------------
> > > > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to:
> > amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > (Web page:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)
> > > > > > --------------------------------------------
> > > > > > Check group FAQ at:
> > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > > > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Send BUG REPORTS to bugs@xxxx
> > > > Send SUGGESTIONS to suggest@xxxx
> > > > -----------------------------------------
> > > > Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to:
amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > (Web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)
> > > > --------------------------------------------
> > > > Check group FAQ at:
> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
> > > >
> > > > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to
> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Get A Free Psychic Reading!
Your Online Answer To Life's Important Questions.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/cjB9SD/od7FAA/AG3JAA/GHeqlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Send BUG REPORTS to bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Send SUGGESTIONS to suggest@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----------------------------------------
Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(Web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)
--------------------------------------------
Check group FAQ at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|