|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Guy,
Just wondering what formula,
COMHACR:= ( FmlVar("COMH-BASICS","COMHCRR") +
> FmlVar("COMH-BASICS","COMHCYY") + FmlVar("COMH-BASICS","COMHCY4") +
> FmlVar("COMH-BASICS","COMHCR4") + FmlVar("COMH-BASICS","COMHCR7") +
> COMHCY7 ) / 3;
> COMHACR;
is for?
Thanks
Rick
----- Original Message -----
From: Guy Tann <grt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2000 1:10 PM
Subject: RE: Another calculation question
> Martin,
>
> I can't blame MS on this one. When I was moving stuff around, I made a
> typo. It was totally my fault. I had tested each component and it
worked.
> Then I moved stuff around and didn't retest everyone. I made a type using
> your CUM() technique (which is working fine, BTW).
>
> I did have some problems with MS and its precision but was able to work
> around that a long time ago (MS for DOS).
>
> Guy
>
> Never be afraid to try something new. Remember, amateurs built the ark,
> professionals built the Titanic.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Martin Haesler
> Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2000 12:21 AM
> To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: Another calculation question
>
> Guy
>
> I'll pass on an area where I had a problem with Metastock's eod
> capabilities.
>
> When I created Don Fishers DGL indicator, I decided to use a date format
of
> YYYYMMDD.
>
> I then extracted the year and month by division.
>
> The remainder (after dividing by 1000000) should have been the "days" DD.
> However, this number turned out to be very unreliable indicating the
> accuracy of MS arithmetic was limited. When I changed the format to YYMMDD
> reducing the division to 10000 all worked well. This of course mean I had
> to allow for the year 2000 in a different way but that's another story.
>
> The point I wanted to bring home to you, is that you cannot assume that MS
> will calculate anywhere near accurately numbers to more than 6 significant
> digits.
>
> With your current situation, I would bring across each of your variables
> into a test indicator and plot it, verifying it is the value you expect.
> Then do your addition and go on from there.
>
> Regards ... Martin
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Guy Tann" <grt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: "Metastock User Group" <metastock-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Sunday, August 20, 2000 4:00 PM
> Subject: Another calculation question
>
>
> > All and Ton, Martin, et al:
> >
> > Well, I'm moving along with my programming thanks to Ton, Martin and all
> > other contributors, but I've reached an impasse trying to get to one of
my
> > more difficult calculations. I am debugging each one of my calculations
> and
> > plotting its individual result in MS and comparing it to a debugging
> program
> > I've written in Clipper. I feel that if I debug each individual
> > calculation, when I get to the end, everything should work.
> >
> > Well, that worked for while, until I reached the following calculation.
> > Something about the best laid plans of mice and men. :)
> >
> > COMHACR:= ( FmlVar("COMH-BASICS","COMHCRR") +
> > FmlVar("COMH-BASICS","COMHCYY") + FmlVar("COMH-BASICS","COMHCY4") +
> > FmlVar("COMH-BASICS","COMHCR4") + FmlVar("COMH-BASICS","COMHCR7") +
> > COMHCY7 ) / 3;
> > COMHACR;
> >
> > I have previously debugged COMHCRR, COMHCYY, COMHCY4, COMHCR4, COMHCR7,
> and
> > COMHCY7 and they all calculate properly and will plot if I set it up.
> This
> > calculation simply adds the six values and divides the total by 3.
> Nothing
> > sophisticated at all. I then moved this variable calculation to another
> > blank indicator to try it. It still didn't work, so I then tried to
> comment
> > out everything but one of the components and that didn't work either
> > (COMHCRR) but when I go back to that variable and set it up to plot, it
> > works fine. I'm terminally confused here.
> >
> > The only thing I can think is that I've exceeded MS programming
> > capabilities, but you would think I would at least get an error message.
> I
> > mean we're not talking brain surgery here, so I assume that I'm doing
> > something stupid. :) For instance, when I reached the point that I had
> > exceeded the calculations one indicator can support (something about
> binary
> > but I didn't write it down) I moved a bunch of the calculations to
another
> > indicator.
> >
> > Is there a limit on the number of indicators that you can program in MS?
> I
> > wouldn't think I'm near any limit, but??? I have a bunch of old
> > calculations and system testers out there. I hadn't planned on it, but
> > should I go out and delete them to make room for the newer stuff?
> >
> > TIA,
> >
> > Guy
> >
> > Never be afraid to try something new. Remember, amateurs built the ark,
> > professionals built the Titanic.
> >
> >
>
>
|