[amibroker] Re: Another, less important, question

["DIMITRIS TSOKAKIS" <TSOKAKIS@xxxxxxxxx>]

> 
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Tomasz Janeczko" 
<amibroker@xxxx> 

> > DEMA is perfectly OK. The same with TEMA, WMA, etc.

What do you mean "perfectly OK".
After how many bars the built-in DEMA matches its EMA-equivalent 
described in your DEMA comment in AFL function reference.
I have already posted #38859 with full explanatory codes and gifs 
showing the divergence of DEMA and EMA-equivalent.
Did you read this message ?
Would you apply equally DEMA or EMA-equivalent in a trading system?
Would you equally rely upon any of these two "equivalent" formulas ?
Would you trade your money based on DEMA or, equally, on EMA-
equivalent?
This would be "perfectly OK"
If for a certain bar DEMA gives you 9 and the EMA-equivalent gives 
11, then it is not perfectly OK, I could say it is quite far from any 
reliability idea.
I did not understand your reply, except if you didnīt read #38859
Dimitris Tsokakis 
> > 



------------------------ 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/