|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
> But Volker, the amount of code to do the same in Easy Language is
> about ONE HALF to ONE THIRD that of Wealth Lab... WHY ?
Personally I could care less if it takes a little more typing to
express an idea -- IF, as a result of that change, the language opens
up vast new abilities that "Easy" Language never thought of.
Simple is great, but only if the power is there too.
> So instead of trading, one must spend more time CODING with WL ?
I have to agree with Volker on this point. If I could spend a little
more time coding, and have a more profitable system (e.g. due to
portfolio analysis, money mgmt, etc) than I could do in TS, I'd say
that's a no-brainer.
Some of these features you can kludge in TS, with great amounts of
pain and lousy support. If you want to use those features, you'll
spend a helluva lot more time kludging around TS's limitations than
you would spend typing a few more characters into WL or whatever.
If TS's simple model is all you need, then obviously you don't need
something like WL. Stick with TS and be happy. If you've run into
TS's limitations, and you could avoid those limitations by using a
slightly more verbose coding language, that sounds like a good
tradeoff to me.
All that assumes that WL provides the features and capabilities you
need. I don't know if it does because I haven't looked at it. But
if it did, a few extra lines of code are a cheap price to pay.
Gary
|