|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
();// class functions (reserved for processes and procedures)
[]; class arrays (reserved for referencing array elements)
Array class examples:
C[5];//fifth element of the C array (absolute nomenclature)
[C,-5];//fifth element back from the 'current' bar (relative
nomenclature)
[array of arrays,parameter];//matrix nomenclature reserved for future
matrix use.
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Tomasz Janeczko" <groups@xxx>
wrote:
>
> Re[2]: [amibroker] Re: A shorter syntax to reference past elements
of arrayYes I would agree, and I was thinking about that too and
liked it, but implementing this would
> a) potentially break existing code (if anybody uses H1 or similar
for any other purpose)
> b) potentially cause the same confusion as C@x or C#1 (positive
number for referring past)
>
> Similar solution is C.1 , H.1 (using dot "member of") and althogh
it does not suffer from a)
> it suffers from b). And no, C.-1 is not an option, since it is
visually to similar to C-.1
> (which is valid statement Close - 0.1 )
>
> All in all, it seems that it would be hard to come up with solution
that would please everybody.
>
> Theoretically just predefining 5 variables O1, L1, H1, C1, V1 just
for "previous bar value of OHLC"
> should address 90% of most common "easy" situations, and then a) is
not a big problem
> since it is only 5 variables.
>
> Best regards,
> Tomasz Janeczko
> amibroker.com
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Herman
> To: Graham
> Sent: Friday, February 20, 2009 1:59 AM
> Subject: Re[2]: [amibroker] Re: A shorter syntax to reference
past elements of array
>
>
> fwiw, I routinely define these values at the top of my code:
>
>
>
>
> O1 = Ref(O,-1);
>
> L1 = Ref(L,-1);
>
> H1 = Ref(H,-1);
>
> C1 = Ref(C,-1);
>
>
>
>
> and also sometimes O2,... O3, ... and so on. dito for other often
used statements.
>
>
>
>
> NONE of the suggested formats can beat this!
>
>
>
>
> herman
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thursday, February 19, 2009, 7:36:01 PM, you wrote:
>
>
>
>
> > I think using the Ref should be kept just the way it is. I
cannot see
>
> > how any alternative method would be less confusing to newbies.
>
>
>
>
> > btw you can change
>
> > P = (Ref(H,-1) + Ref(L,-1) + Ref(C,-1)) / 3;
>
> > to
>
> > P = Ref(H+L+C,-1) / 3;
>
> > and thus reduce the amount of typing :)
>
------------------------------------
**** 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/
|