|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Ah, I see the logic in using that @/# syntax for the symmetry now and
lack of confusion. It has an elegance and is actually shorter as a
shortcut. Just a normal operator called array shift. In C++ they use
>> and << operator for bit shifting operation. I did not see any @
or # operators used. Perhaps a double character operator that looks
like shifting would have some merit. I don't see a <> operator used
(it is used in some languages as !=).
C <> 5
C <> -5
I would like to see shorter versions of some commonly used functions
to make my lines shorter and more readable, but it does not really
matter to me if they are there or not. My program will run either
way. I would much rather have new functions that do something I can
not otherwise do.
BR,
Dennis
On Feb 19, 2009, at 2:13 PM, Tomasz Janeczko wrote:
> Hello,
>
> With all variants the shift could be an array.
>
> The difference is that with identifer( shift ) syntax, the
> identifier must be
> the variable identifier, not anything else, because of ambuiguity
> when used with
> expressions.
>
> However @ and # operators would be able to operate on expressions from
> both left and right side. As for parentheses, they won't be required
> as long
> as you don't want to change the precedence. The idea was that @/#
> operator
> would have precedence equal to ^ (raising to a power), so would be
> executed
> before addition/subtraction and multiplication and division.
>
> With regards to () syntax, Marcin has pointed out some possible
> confusion created by coding like this:
>
>
> Plot( RSI( 14 ), "RSI14", colorRed);
> myRSI = RSI( 20 );
> Plot( myRSI( 5 ), "myRSI", colorBlue);
>
> All in all, although () syntax looks best when applied to close/open/
> high/low,
> it does create confusion when (ab)used :-) as above.
>
> Best regards,
> Tomasz Janeczko
> amibroker.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "markhoff" <markhoff@xxxxxx>
> To: <amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 7:37 PM
> Subject: [amibroker] Re: A shorter syntax to reference past elements
> of array
>
>
>>
>> Tomasz, just one question: is the bar shift limited to fixed numbers
>> or will it also be possible to use variables or expressions, e.g.:
>>
>> a) c@x
>> b) c@x+k
>> c) c@(i+k)
>>
>> Will the parenthesis be required for expressions?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Markus
>>
>> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "markhoff" <markhoff@xxx> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Even it seems that the proposal C() is in favor by most people, I'm
>>> not convienced that using parenthesis is a good idea, since it might
>>> cause confusion with function calls. Ref() is an internal function,
>>> but I don't like to see reserved keywords like C or Close used
>>> like a
>>> function as it would be for C() or Close(). My choice therefore is
>>> C@x
>>> (easy reading "Close AT 5 bars back").
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Markus
>>>
>>> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Tomasz Janeczko" <groups@> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hello,
>>>>
>>>> As a convenience feature I was contemplating for some time to allow
>>>> shorter syntax to very common operation of referring to past
>>> elements of the array.
>>>> As you now current syntax to refer to past is:
>>>>
>>>> Ref( array, -bars )
>>>>
>>>> So close five bars back is Ref( C, -5 )
>>>>
>>>> I don't have any technical problem with adding new operator that
>>> will make it shorter,
>>>> but I am wondering about the most preferrable "form",
>>>> that is easy to use and does not create confusion.
>>>>
>>>> So I would like to ask you which
>>>> "short form" would you prefer.
>>>> - C@x
>>>> - C#5
>>>> - C(5)
>>>> - I don't like the idea at all
>>>>
>>>> Please use this poll to vote:
>>>> http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/surveys?id=2828485
>>>>
>>>> Thank you.
>>>>
>>>> Best regards,
>>>> Tomasz Janeczko
>>>> amibroker.com
>>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ------------------------------------
>>
>> **** IMPORTANT PLEASE READ ****
>> This group is for the discussion between users only.
>> This is *NOT* technical support channel.
>>
>> TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT send an e-mail directly to
>> SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
>>
>> TO SUBMIT SUGGESTIONS please use FEEDBACK CENTER at
>> http://www.amibroker.com/feedback/
>> (submissions sent via other channels won't be considered)
>>
>> For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
>> http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
>>
>> Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> **** IMPORTANT PLEASE READ ****
> This group is for the discussion between users only.
> This is *NOT* technical support channel.
>
> TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT send an e-mail directly to
> SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
>
> TO SUBMIT SUGGESTIONS please use FEEDBACK CENTER at
> http://www.amibroker.com/feedback/
> (submissions sent via other channels won't be considered)
>
> For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
> http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
------------------------------------
**** IMPORTANT PLEASE READ ****
This group is for the discussion between users only.
This is *NOT* technical support channel.
TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT send an e-mail directly to
SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
TO SUBMIT SUGGESTIONS please use FEEDBACK CENTER at
http://www.amibroker.com/feedback/
(submissions sent via other channels won't be considered)
For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:amibroker-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:amibroker-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
amibroker-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|