|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Even the kill file doesn't get rid of this guy. One must suffer through the
hot air in the quotes and comments of others. It is indeed a shame that we
cannot learn about MetaStock without being subjected to such anger and
arrogance. I wonder how many other worthwhile contributors have been run
off...looks like the only escape is to quit the list.
>>Wow, I just signed up for the trial and see all this stuff. I had
>>heard that I could get some help understanding the software
>>but I guess not.
>>
>>What a shame!
>>
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: Don LaBarre
>>To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2000 7:39 AM
>>Subject: Re: Ton Maas Slander
>>
>>
>>Because of all the slander I have receive from Ton Maas I will no longer be
>>sending out my program. Which was a FREE program to help new Metastock
>>users get up and running with real data. Some people on this list feel that
>>if you aren't giving away formulas or trades then your not contributing to
>>the list. There are many ways to help other Metastock users besides just
>>giving help with formulas. It's just too bad that one or two people have to
>>ruin it for the majority.
>>
>>I apologize to all the traders that would have liked to use my program.
>>You're free to send Ton Maas a note expressing your feelings on this
>>subject. I, along with many others, have given up!!
>>
>>Don LaBarre
>>Web Developer
>>Visual Basic Programmer
>>www.u2ecom.com
>>www.cedarcreektrading.com
>>www.auto607.com
>>www.conklinplayers.com
>>
>>----- Original Message -----
>>From: "Guy Tann" <grt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>To: "Metastock User Group" <metastock-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>>Sent: Sunday, October 01, 2000 3:41 AM
>>Subject: calculations
>>
>>
>>> Don,
>>>
>>> Here's part of what I had in one indicator that I called COMHX01X09.
>>>
>>> COMHX03:= ( FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") - Ref(
>>> FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") , -3 )) / 3;
>>>
>>> COMHX04:= ( FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") - Ref(
>>> FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") , -4 )) / 4;
>>>
>>> COMHX05:= ( FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") - Ref(
>>> FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") , -5 )) / 5;
>>>
>>> COMHX06:= ( FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") - Ref(
>>> FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") , -6 ) ) / 6;
>>>
>>> COMHX07:= ( FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") - Ref(
>>> FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") , -7 ) ) / 7;
>>>
>>> COMHX08:= ( FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") - Ref(
>>> FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") , -8 ) ) / 8;
>>>
>>> COMHX09:= ( FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") - Ref(
>>> FmlVar("COMH-MXX","COMHMXX") , -9 ) ) / 9;
>>> COMHX09;
>>>
>>> The only thing missing is COMHX01 and COMHX02. When running, it works
>>> sporadically or not at all. I cut and pasted COMHX01 and COMHX02 into
>>their
>>> own indicators (which is how I tested them in the first place) and they
>>work
>>> fine. I'm now moving all of these back into individual indicators. I
>>have
>>> no idea why this didn't work since I only had 9 variables. The COMX09;
>>> entry was strictly for plotting purposes so I could check out the detailed
>>> results (remember, I'm doing a conversion here and need to verify
>>> calculations to 4 decimal places).
>>>
>>> After verifying my calculation results, I delete the final COMHX09
>>plotting
>>> entry. Anyway, why they don't work when contained in one indicator and do
>>> work when cut and pasted into their own indicator, I have absolutely no
>>> idea.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>>
>>> Guy
>>>
>>> " If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you."
>>>
>>>
>>>
|