Posts made by james

Yes. I'll give this some thought. If I could program, I'd do it for you! Maybe one day I'll learn...

Got 048 local version now. Thank you again!

Did you upload a fresh 047 with the fix? I just downloaded 047 again, and I still seem to have the problem!

Oops! I'm really sorry. I think I may have explained myself badly.

I was talking about two different things, so I'll try to be clearer.

*===//===[/list:u:2j2viy3t]

1 - "Indicator visible" and "Indicator invisible" blocks
I talked of "fuzziness" here. By this I meant, would it be possible to get the "Indicator visible" block, for example, to pass even though there might be a few random bearish signals in an otherwise majority of bullish signals in the indicator's trend? I used the following picture as example to illustrate, and said that there are many indicators that use different buffers (buffer 1 red, and buffer 0 blue in this one) to show bullish/bearish in an overall trend:

The bars are mostly - but not all - blue, but this is still overall a buy signal. When buffer 0 != 0, then the bar is blue.

*===//===[/list:u:2j2viy3t]

2 - "Condition" block
For this block I wondered if it would be possible to have the block compare 2 operands in this way: "pass if the close price of the last n candles is above moving average y". This is different to the "Indicator visible" and "Indicator invisible" blocks. So in the picture below, the condition would pass if, say, the close price of the last 3 candles was above the moving average (brown line):

*===//===[/list:u:2j2viy3t]

And I do understand that you have a development plan that you are working to, and making ad hoc changes here and there may not be suitable for you. However, I do believe that these small features will make fxDreema more powerful and more attractive to users.

Just a friendly thought - or two!

......
Clipboard03.jpg
Clipboard02.jpg

Excellent, as always! Thank you.

I keep getting a compile error when specifying +Npips or -Npips in the "Adjust" field in the Condition block. That said, just occasionally it works!

Here's the extract from MetaEditor:

__')' - parameter expected C:\MetaTrader 4\experts\type 3 v1.mq4 (2331, 114)
[/quote:137a3c2w]

	/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
	// Code of block #2460 (BuySig) //
	void block2460(string _parent_="")
	{if (block2460==false) {return;}
		int crossover=0;
		int crosswidth=1;
		bool o1=false, o2=false;
		
		for (int i=0; i<=crossover; i++) {
		   // i=0 - normal pass, i=1 - crossover pass
		   IndicatorMoreShift(true,i*crosswidth);
		   
		   // Left operand of the condition
		   double Lo=candles_candles("iClose", 1, CurrentSymbol(), CurrentTimeframe());
		   // Right operand of the condition
		   double Ro=(indicators_iMA(180, 0, MODE_SMA, PRICE_CLOSE, CurrentSymbol(), CurrentTimeframe(), 1)-toDigits(2,));
		   
		   if (SkipThePass()==true) {return;}
		   // Conditions
		   if (Lo<Ro) {if(i==0){o1=true;}}else{if(i==0){o2=true;}else{o2=false;}}
		   if (crossover==1) {if (Ro<Lo) {if(i==0){o2=true;}}else{if(i==1){o1=false;}}}
		}
		// Outputs
		if (o1==true) {block698("2460");} else if (o2==true) {/* Yellow output */}
	}

Is the "fuzziness" setting on the "Indicator visible\invisible" blocks going to be workable?

I'd also like to make another suggestion related to this. On the "Condition" blocks, would it be possible to have the same "Additional candles" field you very kindly introduced to the "Indicator visible\invisible" one? This would make it easy to do a condition which says, "for the last n candles, the close price was above moving average y". At the moment I only seem to be able to do this using multiple condition blocks... of course, you may say I've missed something already there, in which case, please accept my apologies, and please tell me where!

Thanks again for your help. Its much appreciated!

Thanks for the reply.

I don't think that bullish/bearish is unique to this indicator at all. A huge number of indicators seem to utilise such a technique, whether it be an oscillator or a line on the chart. Their output from a pair of buffers changes when they signal bear or bull, going from !=0 to =0. I gave an example of one in http://fxdreema.com/shared/9DEU4BIG.

I fully understand that you are wanting to produce something universally useful, and wouldn't want you to compromise that.

So, with that in mind, and looking at the chart I attached earlier today, I can't see how I can get fxDreema to pick up this buy signal when there is a minority of bearish candles scattered randomly through it.

OK. That's great. It seems to be working as expected. Thank you.

Now, another little challenge!

In the above screenshot you'll see that this bullish run also contains some bearish bars. Would it be possible to introduce a "fuzziness" factor whereby n number of bearish bars are ignored if the overall movement of the whole bar range is bullish by x amount? Or something similar to this? And the reverse, of course, for a bearish run?

......
Clipboard03.jpg

Well, all I can say is, I don't know! Having re-downloaded the 046 installer after you'd re-uploaded it to remove the "update #3" message, this problem seems to have gone away! Maybe the problem was centred around the "update #3" message!

Yes, it does. I've tested it in 044.

Have had a look a this now. It seems to work on the "indicators (built in)", but not on "indicators (my indicators)". See http://fxdreema.com/shared/9DEU4BIG. Values don't seem to be picked up from the buffers. Either that or I've done something wrong... again!

__I don't really understand the "c:\fxdreema_046" problem, I use WinRar to create the installer (and yes, you can open the installer exe with WinRar and see what's inside), so when it started it should choose the default 32 bit Program Files folder, for example "C:\Program Files (x86)\fxDreema". I don't recognize this "fxdreema_046", so I need more details here [/quote:y3rcr6fc]
When the installer asks for a path, I don't accept the default. I use c:\fxdreema_046.
__About the "Load project" list - it was wrong in the previous builds actually, because "Date modified" was not able to update... so projects were always listed in the way that the newly created one is on the top. So I fixed that now and on the top it should be the one that is recently modifies. Is this the problem?[/quote:y3rcr6fc]
No. The problem is that no matter what project is clicked to open, the latest one loads.

In the meantime I'll re-download and re-install into c:\fxdreema_046 folder.

When I installed 046, I didn't overwrite 044, but created c:\fxdreema_046.

To load my work into 046, I used "Load project from file". Now when I select "Load project" and choose one from down the list, I only ever get the project listed at the top! Er..?

Also, every time I try to load an earlier project, I am presented with "fxDreema needs to optimize the structure of your personal database files with update #3", and I have to click the continue button.

That's great! I'll test it over the next day or so.

The service you provide to us, your users, is excellent! Well done, and thank you.

Yes. I think that might do it! Thank you so much, as always!

In this screenshot, you'll see two oscillators:

I've zoomed out to show a fairly short run of bars.

Looking at the long run of blue bars in the upper oscillator, I'd like to capture the "over the last n bars, indicator buffer 1 != 0" condition. If the bars are blue, then buffer 1 != 0, even if its value moves from negative to positive. Had there been a red bar in that time, the condition would have failed since buffer 1 would have become 0, and buffer 0 would have held a non-zero figure. The values held in buffers 0 and 1 is the MACD figure. I originally included the MACD to try to explain, but didn't do a good job - sorry! The blue and red bars basically are a bearish/bullish indicator. If bullish, then buffer 1 is filled with the non-zero MACD value, and a blue bar is painted. If bearish, then buffer 1 = 0, and buffer 0 = a non-zero MACD value.

And yes, I don't think the MACD value (bar ID 1 or more) is ever 0 - or at least I've never found it so!

Hope this helps! Sorry for not being clearer in my explanations.

......
Clipboard02.jpg

I don't think that will work. Each of the two "Indicator moves within limits" blocks will check for "100 bars > 0" or "100 bars < 0" respectively. But if the range of values in the 100 bar cycle moves from negative to positive (but is never 0), then the signal will be missed.

So, a 6 bar example:

bar 6 = -1.5
bar 5 = -1
bar 4 = -0.5
bar 3 = -0.2
bar 2 = +0.3
bar 1 = +1.03
[/list:u:dtspltyy]

The range in the above example moves from negative (bar 6) to positive (bar 1), but never equals 0. 4 of the bars are negative, and 2 positive, but none are 0. The number of negative and positive bars would vary from signal to signal, but no bar would be 0.

Therefore what I'm trying to find is; "over the last 100 bars, indicator != 0".

Or have I misunderstood the "Indicator moves within limits" block?!

Yes, sorry. I'm not explaining myself well! I'll try again.

I'm trying to do something like this: http://fxdreema.com/shared/OdnOMKJuc

Therefore; "over the last 100 bars, indicator != 0".

Is there a way of checking for this condition without creating 100 separate condition blocks? At bar close, the indicator value range in this time period of 100 blocks can range from positive to negative, or the other way, but at close never be 0.

Sorry for the confusion!

Actually, no. Sorry. I don't think that's going to work. I don't know what range my indicator will be in during the 100 bar period. All I know is that in that time the particular buffer must not close on 0, so it could close less than or greater than 0, but not 0.

Thus:
*
bar 6 -1.5
bar 5 -1
bar 4 -0.5
bar 3 -0.2
bar 2 0.3
bar 1 1.03
etc...[/list:u:zyeluhrg]

I'm working on whole bars, so the Candle ID will be 1 or greater.

Thanks again.