Quote from madf: I don't need to program in C .. that's the beauty of it. Why should I learn an extra load of surplus knowledge when I can program much easier a simpler and quicker using near English (or American if you insist). ? Then try user friendly tools like TS or Wealthlab. Many years ago I was a computer programmer and I was struck then - as now - by how computer languages are written by programmers for programmers . Then use a simple or higher level language, say VB, Pascal, Matlab or Mathematica if you donât like C or C++. Or use a combination. Indeed some languages are âwritten by programmers for programmersâ. What is wrong with that? Software engineering is difficult and requires advanced tools to accomplish what users want. You are essentially saying programming languages should be dumbed down for the masses, when there are plenty of simple languages and tools already available. Just becuase C enables you to specify what you want does not mean that it is best: I gave an example above which I coded in about 5 seconds as I wrote it. Obviously you arenât using C properly. C on itâs own is very low level. You need to bring in high level functions, libraries or use a higher level math-oriented language like Matlab or Mathematica to efficiently prototype and test strategies. After all, markets are highly numerical. Please code it in C: print it and tell us how long it took. I bet 1. it takes more than the simple line I wrote 2. It took more than 5 seconds I code and test my systems in Matlab. I can configure 10 simulations to run overnight in about 10 minutes of coding, mainly changing single lines of codes, swapping functions, changing parameters, etc. If you arenât an efficient at coding and testing, itâs your own fault. 3. It is incomprehensible to us mortals who don't know C and don't want to either It is your own choice not to educate yourself. Why complain about your own ignorance? I only know a few languages. So what?
I say, never be complete, let us evolve, let the chips fall where they may. Self improvement is self masturbation, now self destruction... So Prophet, you making any money from this quantitative approach of yours? Or are you just adding layers of complexities for fun?
"Why is there this attitude on ET âIf itâs too complicated or sophisticated it must be a waste of time or overkillâ?" said Prophet. Please read what I SAID not what you THINK I said. I did not say "I don't write complicated formula". I said (and I paraphrase) "you don't need to program in C or other programming language to write formula" I note my challenge has not been accepted.. I contend you should use software which allows users to write simple or complex formula in a way which is 1. inuitive 2. easy to use 3. can be learnt quickly and 4. is obviouse from reading what it means (within reason). So I get lambasted and told I should use Pascal or other hi level language. Read my words: traders should be able to write scans in simple logic : should be able to produce complex formula and use multiple timeframes and instruments and do it all easily.. WITHOUT learning another "foreign " language. ANYTHING else is just pandering to lazy software developers who can't produce good easy to use programming languages.. KISS
Madf, You said that programming a system in C requires to âlearn a extra load of surplus knowledgeâ and is âincomprehensible to us mortalsâ and âif you canât learn how to use one in 30 minutes they are too complexâ It is very clear you have the attitude âIf itâs too complicated or sophisticated it must be a waste of time or overkillâ Why debate the fine points when itâs very clear what we are both saying here? As for your challenge⦠intuitive, easy to use, quick to learn rule-based trading software already exists. If it isnât simple enough for you then perhaps thatâs because other users desire familiarity (with other languages), flexibility and expressiveness. You lambasted? I apologize if I seemed overly critical. However you are blaming computer languages for being overly complicated, when they are not. They are tools with certain uses, just like the tools you find in a hardware store. Some versions have been made more complex than they need to be, though on the other hand there are plenty of versions that are simple, even overly simple. Itâs a free market. If there is a better language it will become popular. What you are asking for (pure English trading rules) is hard to find and potentially problematic when you try expressing some slight sophistication. Expression of logic is much easier with a language for that purpose. Again you ought to consider some higher level languages, TradeStation or WealthLab. Maybe you should hire a programmer with a solid computer science background and develop your own interpreted-rule English-based trading system as a plug-in to IB TWS, TradeStation, RealTick or WealthLab. You may find a market for this among people like yourself.
Quote from swoop[TR]: I say, never be complete, let us evolve, let the chips fall where they may. Self improvement is self masturbation, now self destruction... So we should relax, go with the flow, because self improvement is really self destruction? So Prophet, you making any money from this quantitative approach of yours? Or are you just adding layers of complexities for fun? Itâs all for fun. I just add the complexity so that it sounds like I know what Iâm talking about. Not making much money yet. Partly I donât have enough to handle the normal drawdowns. I work on the systems, paper trade them, work on them some more, paper trade, take a few trades, fix execution and data integrity problems, make sure trades match offline simulated tradesâ¦. and so on. Real time paper trades have been excellent in the last month (see my previous posts) on multiple systems. Execution and slippage arenât a problem because they only do a few RTs per day, and always with market orders (backtested and simulated as market orders too).