|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Dans un courrier daté du 17/08/98 04:58:28 , vous avez écrit :
<<
Better than year-old correspondance from Omega to me, by the way, reads
as follows:
(snip)
"A two-dimensional array can be defined as...
Array: twoDim[8, 13](1);
...which makes a grid-shaped numeric array, called "twoDim", with 9
columns, 14 rows and is preinitialized to the number 1 in all of its
elements.
(snip)
It can be easily inferred from these examples that declaring a
multi-dimensional array requires one or more sets of commas; as in the
following example:
Array: nthDim[1-dim, 2-dim, 3-dim,...,nth-dim](0);
To reference its specific elements, a multi-dimensional array requires
comma-seperated indices within a single right/left bracket combination,
as in:
Value1 = nthDim[1-dim, 2-dim, 3-dim];
At this time, there are only 10 dimensions allowed in Easy Language.
This limitation can be lifted if there is significant demand for it.
As with Numeric arrays, String and TrueFalse arrays can be declared and
utilized as multi-dimensional arrays."
(End of correspondance).
The above, therefore, seems to weaken your statement that:
>But the multidimentional TS arrays are not officially documented, and the TS
>KIT DLL functions have never been updated to accesss to these arrays (you
can
>[coud, if not bugged] however go up to N=10 dimensions).
>Means that if its no documented, its not (yet ) recommended for use.
>>
NO. It weakens nothing.
I have also received the above information upon my request from Omega years
ago (was on a fax).
It's not included in the manual or the help online.
So, it's not official in the commercial version.
3D arrays an more are bugged, it's a fact.
3D arrays are unknown to the average user. It's an undocumented feature
<<
In sum, I'll stick by my original statement to Bob Fulks that Omega's
lack of Quality Control borders on the amazing...it couldn't have been
tested.
>>
It's a bug.
A bug always comes from a lack of testing.
One bug in such a piece of software, it's really amazing fora company that you
report to be lacking in debugging.
<<
As for your statement:
>I also eagerly wait the TradeLab official release to laugh as loud as I
could,
>when you will discover bugs of this kind that are mandatory in any software,
>even carefully developed by a very famous programmer.
I very much expect TradeLab to include bugs...and quite agree with you
that bugs are virtually guaranteed in software of any complexity. What
I don't expect to find in TradeLab, however, are bugs present due to
lack of integrity on the part of the author...and releasing code to
thousands upon thousands of unsuspecting customers whose very livlihood
depends upon a certain "presumed integrity in testing" is, in my
opinion, fradulent.
>>
Charging for a lack of integrity or praising for a supposed integrity (that
you do not know in person) only by judging on the number of bugs produced
seems to me an extragalactic behaviour.
<<
( snip )
So perhaps you can talk to us about integrity, Pierre...explain to us
Omega's integrity in the manner in which they deal with bugs. Be
specific. Feel free to cite any Bug Reports of which we may not be
aware. Tell us about Omega's Lost and Found Department for Mysteriously
Disappearing Bug Reports such as reported by Samuel.
>>
I do not know and I dont care.
This thread is beyond the scope of the orignal subject (bug on a DOCUMENTED
feature) and targeted to the classical bitching, if we go further than
announcing the bug with the conditions that applies to it.
<<
I hope you'll excuse my anger, but when I see the downright foolishness
as to how Omega treats it's self-proclaimed "Valued Customers" and when
I read your repeated defenses of Omega's behavior, "it's no wonder", I
think to myself, "that the Mark Brown's of this world go absolutely
ballistic".
All I can say is thank God for the Mark Brown's and the many others on
this List who DON'T spend their time with their heads where the Sun
don't Shine...Vallium bribes or not.
>>
I will not excuse, because you are splitting hairs.
<<
Some of the best advice given to this List was by (I think) Bob Fulks
when he suggested several weeks ago (and I'm paraphrasing here) that now
is an excellent time to "kick the tires"...to check out some of the new
32-bit trading software coming out. I think we would all do well to
heed that advice.
>>
We will see....
<<
As for me, I'll continue to feel that TradeLab "can't get here fast
enough". Yes, it may be a bit late in coming but one thing's for
certain: Bob Brickey sure doesn't need to be told the difference between
a Valued Customer and a Beta Tester.
>>
It's very comfortable to see a problem as a two faces game, like tossing:
Good = Tradelab
Evil =TradeStation
True life is far more complicated , do you know that ?
This also applies to software, trading...
Sincerely,
Pierre Orphelin
----------------------- Headers --------------------------------
Ret >>
|