RE: a new problem with Ref()

["Guy Tann" <grt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Chris,

I probably could have explained it better.  It works, but the results are
wrong.  I'll try to figure out what it's actually doing tomorrow.

Guy

" When I die, I want to go peacefully like my grandfather did, in his sleep.
Not yelling and screaming like the passengers in his car."

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of Mullin285@xxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, September 12, 2000 7:55 PM
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: a new problem with Ref()

Guy

I'm not a function builder [yet] but a couple of thoughts occurred to me ...

When you say it quits working do you mean XNINE does not get a value, the
system crashes... ???

Would it be possible to put XNINE first in your program? Just for testing.
Then would XEIGHT fail instead?

I assume that MXX, -8 is telling the system to get data from 8 periods ago.
If so would it be possible that MMX, -9 [9 days ago] the data is incorrect
and provides an inappropriate value which creates a problem in a
calculation?

Don't know if my thoughts are useful but I thought I would pass 'em on to
see
if they help out.

BTW Are you still looking at options? How's that going?

Chris

In a message dated 9/12/00 7:45:19 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
grt@xxxxxxxxxxxx
writes:

<< Is there a limit in using the Ref() function?

 I have a variable called MXX.  I am manipulating it in a simplistic manner
 and the first 8 worked great.  When I get to the ninth iteration, it quits
 working.

 XEIGHT:=  ( MXX - Ref( MXX , -8 ) ) / 8;   This one works correctly
 XNINE:= ( MXX - Ref( MXX , -9 ) ) / 9;       This one doesn't work!

 Actually, numbers one through eight work fine.  Nine and ten don't work and
 I haven't finished checking eleven through twenty yet.  I assume there's
 something in the manual I missed, so any help would be appreciated.

 Thanks,

 Guy >>