admin wrote:
Metatrader checks the commands for syntaxis - meaning it is well written and inputs have the right type (i.e. you don't have a number when you are supposed to have a character).
Got it. This is what MT4 does. However, what I wanted to know was why the Molanis MQL Editor returns "OK" when the syntax itself is not "OK." That's the question.
admin wrote:
That's what the testing does. It verifies syntaxis, it verifies that compilation is ok.
You did not use the word "Molanis." So, I'm going to assume here, that your reference to "testing" and "compilation" is something that your product (Molanis) is responsible for doing.
admin wrote:
Metatrader does not check that your logic makes sense. It's your job to do that.
Which is the case in any logic driven end-user application, including Excel. Excel, won't define logic for you - but it also won't allow you to create Circular References, as just example. MT4, will allow you to create Circular References when you make a logic error, or mistake in your code.
admin wrote:
[b]Users that do not use the mql icon do not have to worry about this because the strategy builder always generates the right code - there is no need to think or learn mql.
Users that do not use the MQL block, cannot create anything more than the most basic of EAs. There is no way possible, to build any of the EAs that I have created with Molanis thus far, using only the TA+ blocks. It is simply not possible. Therefore, any user of Molanis, who intends to build anything more complex than cross-over strategies while using the TA+ blocks alone, will have to design their own unique iCustom indicators with inherent complex calculations yielding the kind of output (modes) that allows for the design of more complex trade logic.
Otherwise, if you intend to design something sophisticated, you have no choice but to use the MQL block.
admin wrote:
My concern here is that you are confusing beginners implying that our product does not work.
Hopefully, beginners are not wearing blinders and can read for themselves, because I've never implied that your product does not work. To wit, you should actually read some of my very first posts about your product, which praise it for its ability to create basic EA designs in rapid time. Any beginner having read those posts, will draw a different conclusion about what I have actually wrote on this forum.
Moreover, you don't market "Molanis For Beginners." That's not at all what you market, or advertise. You said that I'm confusing beginners, when your own website and product marketing offers, tell beginners outright, that they can create sophisticated EAs using Molanis. Sophisticated EAs, is what I'm trying to produce with Molanis. And, all of my posts to date, have been inline with that goal.
admin wrote:
Your code is the one that does not work. If you do a>b>c, it has a correct syntaxis, the logic does not make sense but the mql is fine. That's what you have to learn.
At the very start of my post, I specifically stated and I even highlighted the original code and the typo containing the error in the operator for AND (&&). So, telling me that my code is the problem, completely missed the point. The question behind the post was not about whether or not the code was correct, or incorrect - I specifically made that clear by pointing out the typo. So, obviously, I would have fixed the typo before making the post.
Therefore, the post had to have been about something else. That something else, happens to be the contradiction in the MQL Editor of Molanis, where I posted pictures of the Editor as it throws a dialog to screen indicating that the syntax was "OK," when it clearly was not "OK." That's what my post was about. However, you've turned it into something else entirely. This post was not about me, or the typo. It was about the question of WHY the Molanis MQL Editor returns an "OK" in syntax that is clearly not "OK."
Here's the dictionary definition of the word Syntax:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/SYNTAXSyntax: noun
2. Logic.
- That branch of modern logic that studies the various kinds of
signs that occur in a system and the
possible arrangements of those signs, complete abstraction being made of the meaning of the signs.
4. Computers .
- The grammatical rules and structural patterns governing the ordered use of appropriate words and
symbols for issuing commands, writing code, etc., in a particular software application or programming language.
Those are not my definitions. So, I can't be accused of confusing beginners with a dictionary definition. Again, hopefully, beginners can read for themselves what I've actually written.
I think you have misinterpreted some of my posts and I don't think you take helpful criticism of your product very well. I ran the "End-User Application Ergonomics" team for several SV software companies. I've run such projects for Bloomberg, Reuters, Thompson, etc., just to name a few. All of the projects were financial market software applications of some kind. My sole responsibility was to increase End-User efficiency through better Application Ergonomics. That's what I used to get paid to do. Today, I write my own checks as a full-time trader. My posts probably reflect the years of experience that I have with applications and their respective ergonomic intelligence.
I have given you several product enhancements ideas, all based on End-User ergonomic considerations that prevent Molanis users from being able to build certain kinds of EAs, and/or certain classifications of trade logic. The multiple ideas about the Integrated MQL Editor Functions, and especially the ideas about the MQL Iteration Editor. Having an Iteration Editor, would allow traders to create dynamic trade execution ranges, without knowing how to code in MQL - which is supposed to be what Molanis is all about! Not to mention the five (5) other product enhancements that further improve the traders ease of use, that I have not posted.
The reason I have not posted those enhancement ideas, is because you claim to want End-User input about how to advance Molanis, but when you get that input, you don't seem to appreciative to have received it.
admin wrote:
If you use the mql icon you need to know a bit of mql. Again, this forum is not an mql forum. This forum is for product support, teaching mql is beyond free support. Your mql question should be asked in a different forum.
So, you do need to know MQL in order to build anything beyond a simple cross-over system, or anything more complex than that.
Here's a really important bit advice - you can take this anyway you like. You have decided to enter the business of Visual EA Development for the MetaTrader Trading Platform. That decision comes with some responsibility and it should come with the common sense understanding that you cannot separate MetaTrader Expert Advisors and MetaTrader Indicators, from its native programming language, MQL. That's like trying to separate Hydrogen from Oxygen in an H2O binding. Everyone, already knows and understands that MetaTrader itself, is lousy at providing product support. That's a known fact throughout this business.
When you come to market with a product and you claim that product to bridge the gap between the Complicated and the Uncomplicated, that's a very tough responsibility to uphold, when you start to get to ground zero where the EA has to actually work. Shielding the End-User from complexity is a great goal, but at the end of the day, most traders grow out of the need for simple cross-over systems. When your product claims to allow the trader the ability to create sophisticated EAs, and requires the use of native code, and then you side-step the support merely because the trader posts questions about said native code, then you failing to meet the mandate that you set for the product.
I think you are 100% correct. If you are going to build a complex EA for use in MetaTrader, then knowing something about MQL is mandatory. However, when you market your product as being the solution that bridges the gap between the simple and the complex, and you offer that solution with the stipulation that "No Programming is Necessary," then you need to step-up to the plate and meet the mandate that you place on yourself.
Passing the MQL buck to snake pits like MQL4.om, where every post turns into a contest of "Guru's" who don't know the difference between being a good programmer, and being a good trade logic developer, is probably not the best idea, or the best place to send your customers and/or your
potential customers. If there were a genuine place to go to online to learn MQL, that might be a horse of another color. But, viper pits like MQL4.com, are places were MQL coders like to go to show-up what they know, not necessarily help a newcomer to MQL get up to speed. Just some FYI, in case you were not already posting on MQL4.com.
It is very unfortunately that your misreading and misinterpretation of my both my motives and your product, lead to such a diversion in this thread. People have already stated on this forum, that they have learned something from my posts, given the kinds of things that I try to do inside my EAs. So, why you would, or could misinterpret what I actually posted, when anyone can read it for themselves, is only something that you can answer.
All the best with your product and your business model.
Regards,
cfx