|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Dans un courrier daté du 14/12/98 18:40:42 Heure d6iver Pari42 Madrid,
a.myers@xxxxxxxx a écrit :
>
> You probably *are* a genius, Pierre.
Tskkk...
Absolutely not, (*) added or not.
I'm only stubborn more than what you can imagine.
I also have teached physical and chemistry and solved for students ( and
learned to them how to) thousands of problems where the information were
minimal, but sufficient.
Most of the problems are solved like this: a seeming unavailable information
is maybe hidden , then you have to search this piece of information before
solving.
We do not leave in a world where all is perfect.
If you believe this, or if you believe that it should be like this, you have
a lot to learn on human psychology.
EL manuals are what they are, better than nothing .
They do not replace your brain in any case
> You also have an advantage of
> being a long term TS user, having the complexities of newer versions and
> builds introduced to you a little at a time.
Yes, so what? most of the new features are not the most difficut that I had to
understand.
>
> It is not so much a case of the manual being incorrect as it is
> deficient. I'm sure that errors exist somewhere as well, but that's not
> my point here. I recently wrote OmegaResearch addressing these very
> issues, as I'm not happy.
>
> One small example (there are others that I know about and probably a lot
> that I don't - yet) of where the manual is deficient is in it's
> description of the MaxBarsBack setting. The manual gives a description
> of this similar to what you would find in a dictionary. It is not
> incorrect, but doesn't even come close to describing the this feature,
> nor does it place the correct amount of emphasis on how important this
> is.
>
The pop up message that appears whe, MBB is not enough is more effective than
a bold warning buried in the manual.
Usually, when this occured 2 or 3 times, most of the pepople take care of what
MBB really does.
> Here are just some of the things that it *doesn't* tell you. I suspect
> that it is not an all inclusive list. It doesn't mention that where
> there are two or more data series, the MBB setting has to be set so that
> all calculations begin on the same bar for both (or more) data series.
Above recipe also apply.
I confess that this one is not so obvious.
But believe me or not, solving this by experience is more rewarding for your
programming ability than reading it in the manual.
We must suffer to succeed.
This is a general rule.
> This means extra data in Data2, Data3 etc. as well. It doesn't say that
> if you have an XAverage of an XAverage that the MBB should be the sum of
> the lengths.
Your example is wrong with Xaverages , because they need MBB set to 1, and the
combination is independent for the lookback period.
This could have been true in your example with Average, but not Xaverage.
> It doesn't say that if you set MBB to be too large, that
> the results can be different than if it is set exactly correct. It
> doesn't point out that you *won't* get an error message that 'MBB is
> incorrectly set', you will just get incorrect results, something for you
> to discover in your spare time.
>
MBB set large does not produce intinsic different results.
It only differ the starting value of the calculation to some bar further.
This has an effect on recursive calculation, but MBB is not the cause, only a
sequel of the shift in the frsr calculation and of the fact that recursive
calculation that need several bars to stabilize.
If people could try to undersand the function that they use before anything ,
things could be different.
Omega should have to write a 3500 page manual, and I'm sure that most of you
would never read it before using the software.
> As a testament to how unclear and incomplete this section is in the
> manual, everytime I've requested help from the EL support, the first
> line of their response is instructions to check the MBB setting.
Yes, because it's the most frequent error.
But what do you do when reading the error message ,
Calling technical support is not the good solution ( it's the minimum effort
solution)
Increasing MBB as asked by the message is not a solution IF you do not know
why it was necessary.
If it solves and if you have not understood why it has fixed the error, no
progress has been made.
Again, the solution is in the personal knowledge of the EL functionality, that
is mainly obtained by experience ( from errors and search of the CAUSE of the
error).
>
> My main complaint with the manual is that it is part of an incomplete
> package of instruction on the use of this complex product. The manual
> is not designed to quickly enable a new user, who has no programming
> experience, to become an intermediate level EL programmer. There is no
> tutorial as is common with almost all software of even moderate
> complexity (instead, there is Expert Commentary - what a joke!). There
> are free seminars, but if you don't live in or close to a major city in
> the continental US, you are out of luck. There's nothing on their
> website, except where you can find (some, not all)third party
> assistance. These can be useful, as can be the EL support, but you have
> to know what questions to ask!
>
TS does not make exception with other language.
I do not know of a C++ programmer that has never read a book on C++ excepted
the manual coming with the C++ compiler.
EL is not widely spread as other general purpose languages are.
So, the bibliography is poor.
You may consider TS Express, Arthur Putt's books if you want to do serious
programming.
You cannot expect so much information from Omega that has 25 000 users of its
specific language.
The manual as existing now, is not so bad when considering the economic
situation in this narrow market.
It could have been worse than now .
> My opinion, FWIW, is that providing any or all of these things would be
> in conflict with the marketing claims that you can describe your system
> as you would to another trader. I don't know about typical sentence
> structure in French (okay, a little), but I've never known anyone to
> talk like they were reading code! OmegaResearch has dropped the ball on
> this one, and the poorly designed manual is certainly part of the
> general omissions that they are guilty of. The MBB example is just one
> small part of an incomplete whole.
>
Easy Language name is misleading you.
It's easy for easy things.
You can translate simple statements into english like programming.
This has the limitation of no programming language ( there is a point where
the structure of a programming language is necessary).
Sincerely,
Pierre Orphelin
www.sirtrade.com
|