|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Dans un courrier daté du 27/10/98 06:55:56 Heure d6iver Pari56 Madrid,
Alain.Jossart@xxxxxxxxxx a écrit :
>
> Gary,
>
> Pierre's purpose was to present EL as a more efficient and suited
> Trader language than VB.
>
> It's funny but the programmer (I am) failed to understand how this
> rewriting is possibily a real creation, or an optimization of :
>
> Value0=c-c[3];
> Value3= .03*(value0-value0[1])+ .97*value3;
>
> Unless I missed the point and optimization does refer to the original
> ("basic like") code using three lines while EL only requires two ?
>
My purpose was to demonstrate that people able to do such mistakes with Easy
language will certainly do bigger mistakes with Visual Basic, that has MORE
features than EL, so more reasons to write stupid code.
VB has more power than EL has.
Period.
This is not a proof that an average EL user will use it with benefit.
Despite that fact that you are a programmer, you do not master EL to write an
adequate comment in this case.
The benefit was not to reduce there lines into 2, but:
-To avoid 1 momentum calculation ( a price difference).
-To avoid to store intermediate calculation in value1 and value2, because
previous values of c-c[1] are already stored in the maxbars back array, and I
only refer to the previous values of TWO variable instead of THREE.
> I'm sure most of use do remember the good old times when PC BASIC
> was an interpreted language on 1000x slower PC's and programmers
> were judged based on their capabilities to write the shortest possible
> code. I've beaten them all hands down :
>
> A=c-c[3];B=.03*(A-A[1])+.97*B;
>
This solution is valid too.
It's the solution that I posted!!!
You have just changed the same of variables into A et B ( this do not spare EL
TOK code), and concatened it into a single line.
The lenght of the compiled code will be the same!!!!
More, it will not work because "A" used as a variable name is an EL skip word
that will not verify in Easy language!
> Nice EL code, but are you convinced ? - Where is the demonstration
> that, once compiled, it is certainly faster than a compiled :
>
> VALUE1 = @MOMENTUM(C,3);
> VALUE2 = @MOMENTUM(C,3)[1];
> VALUE3 = .03*(VALUE1-VALUE2)+(1-.03)*VALUE3;
>
> The truth is not there ! The kind of optimization games doesn't make
> any sense for a modern programmer... they should even less for
> a trader.
Read my post again.
It was only a simple example posted to this list.
The problem is not the language in itself, but more the user of the language
and its own knowledge of it.
Thanks for your demonstration. It's the prof that I was right:
You failed yourself in your demonstration, live!
Pierre Orphelin
www.sirtrade.com
We do old time programming too, web design included.
|