|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
At 9:15 AM -0400 8/19/98, William Brower wrote:
>At 08:07 PM 8/17/98 -0400, Bob Fulks wrote:
>>The TS Express Newsletter of Jul/Aug 1996, page 10, talks about
>>"Multidimensional Arrays". "Multi" means more than two. I dug out that
>>issue before I tried to use this feature to see what it said. I found the
>>article useful so I decided to try it. And, son-of-a-gun, the program
>>compiled perfectly! No error messages! Wow, this is great! As Gary Fritz
>>pointed out, there are other simple ways to do the same thing so I didn't
>>NEED this feature, but since it was there, why not use it.
>
>It was never the intention of that article to imply that there is anything
>greater than 2 dimensional arrays. The example used 2 dimensional arrays.
Thanks for the response. I understand that your example used two
dimensions. As I said, I read the article and found it useful, as I do most
of your articles.
I still think the term "multi" implies more than two. If the new feature
extended the capability from one dimension to only two, I would have
thought the headline would have been "Two Dimensional Arrays".
I also recall hearing from other sources that multiple dimensions were
supported.
But it is quite clear from the message from Omega quoted by David Miller
that Omega intended the capability to be multidimensional, in fact, up to
ten dimensions:
----
<Start of quote>
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 quote>
---
In addition, a statement using three dimensions verifies perfectly.
Obviously, if only two dimensions were intended, the compiler should balk
at such a usage.
But my intention was not to criticize your newsletter or Pierre's job as
Technical Editor of the Newsletter. It is not your job to test Omega's
software. There seem to be people reading this into my message so I would
like to clarify this.
My point was that if I were Omega and introduced a new version with a new
feature that was prominently featured in a popular publication, I would
certainly make sure that feature worked properly!
Thanks again for the response.
By the way, the recent TS Express article on writing code to use the
"Expert Commentary" feature of TradeStation was super. I now use it all the
time and it has saved me lots of time.
Bob
|