|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Dans un courrier daté du 15/12/98 07:38:32 Heure d7iver Pari32 Madrid,
a.myers@xxxxxxxx a écrit :
> Pierre,
>
> I appreciate you taking the time to reply.
>
Woah... thanks
> Perhaps I do have a lot to learn. In terms of idealism, I remain about
> 20 yrs. old. You seem to have inferred that I am ungrateful for all
> that Omega supplies. You are correct. I know that nothing worthwhile
> is easy, but that is a misleading argument. My assertion was that Omega
> produced a poor manual. The imperfect world argument doesn't address
> this. An imperfect world argument also doesn't excuse OmegaResearch
> from making claims that aren't true, even if you believe that the
> deception should be obvious.
>
1-The manual could be better.
2-The users could be better
Solving for 1 does not solve for 2 in any case.
> > 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.
> > Easy Language name is misleading you.
> > It's easy for easy things.
>
> Reasoning like this, extended, suggests that not having a manual at all
> would be even better, since that would increase the suffering, and
> hence, the intrinsic reward. It could have been called
> DifficultButRewardingAfterSufferingLanguage, but that lacks the ol'
> marketing zip, doesn't it?
>
There is a compromlise between no manual at all and a perfect manual
DifficultButRewardingAfterSufferingLanguage (TM) is a good name, but not
commercial enough.
> > The pop up message that appears whe, MBB is not enough is more effective
> than a bold warning buried in the manual.
>
> Perhaps that's the problem, I've not had that pop up message occur!
I cannot we how you could have been informed of a MBB problem without the
message!
>
> > 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.
>
> I stand corrected. What page do I find this on?
Not in the manual.
You must understand how functions are coded.
If you edit Xaverage, you got the answer
inputs : Price(NumericSeries),Length(NumericSimple);
vars : Factor(0);
if Length + 1 <> 0
then begin
if CurrentBar <= 1
then begin
Factor = 2 / (Length + 1);
XAverage = Price;
end
else
XAverage = Factor * Price + (1 - Factor) * XAverage[1]; <<====This means
that you need one bar before currentbar, so MBB could be set to 1 (length is
not used as a lookback measurement expressed in bars, because it is only used
in the Factor calculation.
end;
>
> > MBB set large does not produce intinsic different results.
> > It only differ the starting value of the calculation to some bar further.
>
> That's what I thought but I did have trouble with inconsistent results
> on the same data, and EasyLanguage support told me that about MBB too
> large when I called. What am I to make of that?
>
Understanding MBB definition and properties from page 126 and 142 of the EL
manual ( 1997) is enough in my opinion
> > Yes, because it's the most frequent error.
>
> And precisely why I chose this as an one example of how the manual is
> deficient.
MBB message==> EL amnual (Table of Contents) ==> search MBB ==> Go p 126 and
142 ==>edit the concerned code and see Value[n] references ==> answer found
==> No call of the tech.support
>
> > 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 .
> > 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.
>
> Rather than argue the manual point by point, let me rephrase my argument
> to you since you responded. You mention that you taught physics and
> chemistry. Given your teaching background combined with your
> considerable knowledge of TS, would you be capable of designing a manual
> that does a better job of teaching new (and other) users about TS than
> the one supplied by Omega, if it were in your best interests to do so?
> I'm assuming (naively?) that OmegaResearch and you follow the principle
> that if it is worth doing at all, then it should be done to the best of
> your ability.
>
I could write a more pedagogic manual, not on EL, but how to understand and
solve mistakes in EL .
EL manual is a reference manual, not an how to do from A to Z manual.
It's how to do from A to E.
I could, but I have no time.
We assume that the manual shoud be written in french ( otherwise, better to
stay with EL manual as is).
Sincerely,
Pierre Orphelin
> ~Alan
>
|