+1 888 340 6572
MultiCharts Project Management
previous_open_issue.png
Go to the previous open issue
previous_issue.png
Go to the previous issue (open or closed)
star_faded.png
Please log in to bookmark issues
feature_request_small.png
Open Feature request MC-903

clarified order types

action_vote_minus_faded.png
6
Votes
action_vote_plus_faded.png
next_issue.png
Go to the next issue (open or closed)
next_open_issue.png
Go to the next open issue
Description

Enhancement of order syntax

Steps to reproduce this issue

I like to have a simple addition made to PL that would alleviate the confusion brought about by the inconsistent meaning of the word "bar" in the various order types.  Orders using "next" with IOG enabled changes the term "bar" to mean "tick". For orders using "this" the term "bar" doesn't mean "tick" under any circumstances. I'm suggesting we have a clearer syntax to avoid this confusion in the first place, and make coding in PL so much more readable. Such a small change would make a huge and beneficial difference, especially for novices.
So, I suggest we have additional orders like
buy 2 contracts next tick at market
to avoid the confusion with "bar" when it can actually can mean either tick or completed bar depending on the order type when IOG is turned on.  This would be used in place of the traditional order:
buy 2 contracts next bar at market
and both will have the exact same effect when IOG is turned on.  The difference is the readability of the code and avoidance of the confusion stated above.  If the first example code is used in a study where IOG is not turned on, then the complier should report an error to warn the user.
As an extra suggestion, which may be more difficult to implement, we then can have intrabar orders and non-intrabar orders in the same study without the need to specify "[IntrabarOrderGeneration = True]".  In other words, the first example code above would automatically force the study to run as if IOG was turned on in the present way, but the second one above would not act on the next tick but on the next bar.  For backward compatibility, the existing commands and method of enabling IOG of course will remain and nothing changes.  This second suggestion would enhance the power of a study for sophisticated traders, and at the same time make the code easier to understand for novices.  However, implementation of just the first suggestion would be welcome for the reasons stated above.

Comments (0)
History
Issue basics
  • Type of issue
    Feature request
  • Category
    Usability
  • Targeted for
    Not determined
  • Status
    Under Review
User pain
  • Type of bug
    Not triaged
  • Likelihood
    Not triaged
  • Effect
    Not triaged
Affected by this issue (3)
People involved
Times and dates
  • Posted at
  • Last updated
Issue details
  • Resolution
    Not determined
  • Severity
    Normal
Attachments (0)
There is nothing attached to this issue
Commits (0)
There are no code checkins for this issue
Duplicate issues (0)
This issue does not have any duplicates