|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
I think using the Ref should be kept just the way it is. I cannot see
how any alternative method would be less confusing to newbies.
btw you can change
P = (Ref(H,-1) + Ref(L,-1) + Ref(C,-1)) / 3;
to
P = Ref(H+L+C,-1) / 3;
and thus reduce the amount of typing :)
--
Cheers
Graham Kav
AFL Writing Service
http://www.aflwriting.com
2009/2/20 brian_z111 <brian_z111@xxxxxxxxx>:
> Tomasz,
>
>> I have second thoughts as well, as it truly may create lots of
>>confusion.
>
> No, don't start having doubts now ...you were correct in the first
> place.
>
> The Ref() part of the function was always redundant and overkill for
> such a simple thing (it isn't even really a function is it?).
>
> Signed integers are NOT truly intuitive but actually just
> subconscious habit .... it is in our minds from our school days that
> (-) means go left along the number line and (+) means go right along
> the number line.
>
> Keep to this worldwide (mathematical) convention and all will be well
> e.g.
>
> - in bar index we start at the first bar and go right 0,1,2,3 etc
> - in referencing bars from today, we go left C(-5) or right C(+5) ...
> except that the plus sign is also redundant.
>
>
> I commend you on your attention to detail ... many small improvements
> are just as important as one big one.
>
> The only thing is you are far nicer than me ... I wouldn't poll ...
> the only 'people' I would ask would be my muses, simply because their
> error rate is so low (usually caused by the fact I don't listen).
>
> Many times in the past I thought the Ref() was a waste of my typing
> time and very annoying.
>
> Last night I wrote some code, at zboard.wordpress.com, to help the
> community understand Pivots (many seem to be making them
> unnecessarily difficult),
>
>
> It included:
>
> P = (Ref(H,-1) + Ref(L,-1) + Ref(C,-1)) / 3;
>
> ... enough said.
>
> Then again, maybe not.
>
> Please give me:
>
> P = H(-1) + L(-1) + C(-1);
>
> Actually parenthesis or [] doesn't really matter because it is
> dependent on context and it is normal for 'programmers' to be
> particular with syntax (afterall it does change from lanuage to
> language and we have to mentally handle that fact).... you woul be
> better not to concede to soft appeals for syntax preferences because
> any developer of language is soon going to run out of special
> characters if ... technically speaking contextual use of [] is
> efficient and an acceptable way to do it (even for me!)
>
> People don't like change ... in the first place I only learnt Ref()
> from you.
>
> Also, the problems created by look forward oppurtunities are highly
> over-rated ... it is sometimes useful to look forward (for what if
> scenarios or projecting indicators into the future).
>
> We can handle look forward issues ourselves (if not better get a real
> job).
>
>
> IMO you would be better off maintaining consistency of number line
> signed directions everywhere e.g. LLV(array,-5) is the lookback for 5
> periods and LLV(array,5) is the look forward 5 periods.
>
> Once again it is up to us when and how to use it ... a look forward
> warning in the function manual is quite adequate.
>
>
>
> Two other small details .... just as annoying:
>
> - search inside charts/formulas looking for the one you left there
> sometime last year (what did I call it?)... once you get a lot of
> them you can't keep track of them all, even with folders (syntax
> exhaustion leads us to name AFL files all sorts of wierd, non-
> intuitive things).
>
> - auto completion of typing in FormulaEditor (how about macro for
> custom auto complete?)... typinc the same thing over and over makes
> me cranky.
>
> Also I apologise that I don't use the feedback center ... I empathise
> with you but it is too much like work for me ... I accept my informal
> suggestions get lost in the noise ... at least if I make a major
> suggestion I put it into a semi-formal document that you can pick up
> and file (on the rare occasion that you like the idea).
>
> Also, if I file at the feedback center only a few people see it ...
> if I run a short campaign here then the forum has the chance to
> consider the idea and action it privately if you don't pick it up ...
> IMO that is added value to the FC.
>
>
> I think it is OK to do that as long as the campaign is short and then
> brought to a close (once and for all) or moved elsewhere (like the
> zboard for stats for traders).g
>
> BTW I like a lot of your recent additions to AB ... chart linking is
> great .. AddSummaryRows is a step in the right direction ...
> DaysSince1900 is a very important addition .. lots of other good
> things (sometimes the little things leverage a lot of action).
>
> I often forget to post and thank you for your successes.
>
> brian_z
>
> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Tomasz Janeczko" <groups@xxx>
> wrote:
>>
>> Re: [amibroker] A shorter syntax to reference past elements of
> arrayHerman,
>>
>> You are right that it maight be confusing, therefore I was thinking
> about using this short form only to reference past
>> (as it is most common scenario, considering the fact that we all
> the time attempt *not* to look into the future).
>>
>> The whole story is just to make common expressions like C - Ref(
> C, -1 ) shorter, like this: C - C(1)
>> but I have second thoughts as well, as it truly may create lots of
> confusion.
>>
>> Best regards,
>> Tomasz Janeczko
>> amibroker.com
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Herman
>> To: Tomasz Janeczko
>> Sent: Thursday, February 19, 2009 5:20 PM
>> Subject: Re: [amibroker] A shorter syntax to reference past
> elements of array
>>
>>
>> Sorry , but imo the new forms are critic and counter intuitive.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> C(5) looks back 5 bars.... what would looking forward look like? C
> (-5)?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> imo, very confusing. I can't help but wonder what made this idea
> surface :-))
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> herman
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Thursday, February 19, 2009, 11:08:25 AM, you wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Hello,
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > As a convenience feature I was contemplating for some time to
> allow
>>
>> > shorter syntax to very common operation of referring to past
> elements of the array.
>>
>> > As you now current syntax to refer to past is:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Ref( array, -bars )
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > So close five bars back is Ref( C, -5 )
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > I don't have any technical problem with adding new
>>
>> > operator that will make it shorter,
>>
>> > but I am wondering about the most preferrable "form",
>>
>> > that is easy to use and does not create confusion.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > So I would like to ask you which
>>
>> > "short form" would you prefer.
>>
>> > - C@x
>>
>> > - C#5
>>
>> > - C(5)
>>
>> > - I don't like the idea at all
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Please use this poll to vote:
>>
>> > http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/surveys?
> id=2828485
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Thank you.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Best regards,
>>
>> > Tomasz Janeczko
>>
>> > amibroker.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > ------------------------------------
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > **** IMPORTANT PLEASE READ ****
>>
>> > This group is for the discussion between users only.
>>
>> > This is *NOT* technical support channel.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT send an e-mail directly to
>>
>> > SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > TO SUBMIT SUGGESTIONS please use FEEDBACK CENTER at
>>
>> > http://www.amibroker.com/feedback/
>>
>> > (submissions sent via other channels won't be considered)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check
> DEVLOG:
>>
>> > http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Yahoo! Groups Links
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > Individual Email | Traditional
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/join
>>
>> > (Yahoo! ID required)
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > mailto:amibroker-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>> > mailto:amibroker-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > amibroker-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> **** IMPORTANT PLEASE READ ****
> This group is for the discussion between users only.
> This is *NOT* technical support channel.
>
> TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT send an e-mail directly to
> SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
>
> TO SUBMIT SUGGESTIONS please use FEEDBACK CENTER at
> http://www.amibroker.com/feedback/
> (submissions sent via other channels won't be considered)
>
> For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
> http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
>
> Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>
>
------------------------------------
**** IMPORTANT PLEASE READ ****
This group is for the discussion between users only.
This is *NOT* technical support channel.
TO GET TECHNICAL SUPPORT send an e-mail directly to
SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
TO SUBMIT SUGGESTIONS please use FEEDBACK CENTER at
http://www.amibroker.com/feedback/
(submissions sent via other channels won't be considered)
For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:amibroker-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:amibroker-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
amibroker-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|