[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Easy Language Documentation: The Finale



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links

Dans un courrier daté du 13/11/98 19:57:58 Heure d7iver Pari58 Madrid,
bnm03@xxxxxxx a écrit :

> Once again -- that's about 20 times now -- Pierre you have missed the point.
>  My contention was that you nit picked my original 1 line function for
stupid
>  things -- things which everybody agrees don't matter in functions like
this.
>  
>  You also made several incorrect assumptions which you didn't bother to
>  verify before submitting.  One was the function was never intended to be
>  plotted.  YOU SHOULD READ YOUR LETTERS TWICE.  Such hypocracy is so typical
>  from your pontificatory camp.
>  

I did this mainly to bother you. Do not try to find any other explanation.
This one is the truth.
It's in fact  a antibashing cyberserum from the Pasteur Institute of France (
Ebola-Omega Dept).
Success in most of cases, but sometimes needs several doses.
Various bashers have experimented it on this list, and none died.
Now we can stop.

>  I originally posted code to demonstrate how what Earl was talking about
>  could be done.  The code was never the issue but you quickly made it one to
>  settle an old score.  I was not attempting to document a CLEVER approach to
>  EL programming.  This was an incorrect assumption.  I was trying to show
how
>  solving for a variable could be done.  I provided EL code because it was
the
>  easiest way to show the mathematical relationship.
>  

Yes.
I never had a doubt on it.

>  But NO, you had to go and make it into code issue to try and demonstrate
>  just what a BIG guy you were.  SO WHOSE THE ONE WITH THE EGO?  No doubt you
>  have spent a great deal of time with EL as I have with my studies but
please
>  make sure you HAVE THE POINT BEFORE YOU LEAP!!!!  I KNOW THAT YOU PROBABLY
>  ONLY UNDERSTAND ABOUT 1/2 OF WHAT I WRITE DUE TO THE LANGUAGE BARRIER BUT
>  SHUOLD YOU REALLY CRITICIZE FOR SOMETHINGS YOU CAN"T FULLY UNDERSTAND?
>  

(The problem with our cyberserum is that it still has some secondary
cybereffects).

We also have had to figh with the 64k EL barrier and started our own TS DLL's
in 1992...( I have some basis in C, but cannot consider myself as  a C
programmer. I now enopugh to understand a C code DLL for TradeSation, and
that's enough for me). 

The biggest EL code that I have produced was a 5 includesystem one, that was
producting an option evaluation performance summary on most options
strategies, the option buy -sell signal being given by any trading system
running in TS.
I have nothing to prove because I do not care of what people coud thing of
what I'm able to do or not.This is my private EL life...


>  I have actually been complimentary of your EL code in the past.  Did you
>  forget this?
>  
I forgot, I'm sorry...

>  Clever programming isn't my style.  I code to get it done and make sure
that
>  it works reliably.  If turns out to be elegant and clever great.  If not so
>  what -- it still works and works reliably.  I have more advanced EL code
>  (the iterative pivot point finder) and a lot of other stuff.  I don't trade
>  systems so I don't write systems and I would never be so pretentious to say
>  I did.
>  

Regardless of this one, the discussion was interesting, because too much
people do not pay attention to this.
When writing real trading systems that you want to optimize, this mandatory
work can save hours of CPU time, not to speak of precision problems that can
be often avoided without dealing with double precision as in VB or C.
Your example was very simple to modify, and it was also a good chance to deal
with this issue.

Someone asked to me to modify (simplify) the recent Legan's code posted here.
There is a lot of work to do on this one, but I have no  free time for this.
However it could be a rewarding exercise.

>  Please Pierre, continue attempting to help people on this list.  And I hope
>  they continue to buy your stuff.
>  

My first goal anyway ( to help , heh).
If people wan to buy what we sell, they are free as they can test for $0.00
cyber$ ( approx: 0.00 cyberEuros).
That represents an initial 0.00 % cyberRisk.

>  But for everyone's sake and mine make sure you get the facts straight
before
>  rushing off to repair your damaged ego and settle old scores.
>  

We could agree that we have  stop now with this thread.

>  Regards,
>  Brian.
>  

CyberSincerely,
-Pierre Orphelin