#property strict
int ticket;
void OnTick()
{
double AccountBal;
double MAfast = iMA(_Symbol,PERIOD_CURRENT,20,0,MODE_EMA,PRICE_CLOSE,0);
double MAslow = iMA(_Symbol,PERIOD_CURRENT,30,0,MODE_EMA,PRICE_CLOSE,0);
AccountBal = AccountBalance()/10000;
double Force = iForce(_Symbol,PERIOD_CURRENT,13,MODE_SMA,PRICE_CLOSE,0);
double rsi = iRSI(_Symbol,PERIOD_CURRENT,7,PRICE_CLOSE,0);
if((rsi> 70)&&(OrdersTotal()==0)&&(MAfast>MAslow)){
ticket = OrderSend(_Symbol,OP_BUY,AccountBal,Ask,10,Ask-0.007,Ask+0.007,"This iS Buy",33,0,clrBlue);
}
if((rsi <30)&&(OrdersTotal()==0)&&(MAslow>MAfast)){
ticket = OrderSend(_Symbol,OP_SELL,AccountBal,Bid,10,Bid+0.007,Bid-0.007,"This is a Sell",33,0,clrRed);
}
}
The code works and everything is great but when a order is open like a buy order, even if the the conditions are true for sell order it wont place the order until the open one hits take profit or stop loss, the Orders Total function is screwing me over is there anyway I can replace it?
Related
Why does the first code generate a list of random numbers with repetition and the second code a list of numbers without repetition? The difference is only a list declared with int[] in (1) and int{} in(2).
1.)
final generatedRandoms = <int>[];
final rng = Random();
while (generatedRandoms.length < 100) {
final gr = rng.nextInt(100) + 1;
generatedRandoms.add(gr);
}
2.)
final generatedRandoms = <int>{};
final rng = Random();
while (generatedRandoms.length < 100) {
final gr = rng.nextInt(100) + 1;
generatedRandoms.add(gr);
}
Because of this declaration:
final generatedRandoms = <int>[];
versus
final generatedRandoms = <int>{};
The first declares a list, the second declares a set.
Lists can hold multiple values, even duplicates, while sets cannot have duplicates. Since both loops run until there are 100 items in the container, you might get duplicates in the first example and you will not have duplicates in the second.
If you time them, you will notice the second one takes longer on average, because it will geenerate a lot more than 100 random numbers to get to 100 unique numbers.
Unfortunately I am not able to post the code I am debugging as it is not mine and I am bound not to show it... BUT I will describe it as detailed as possible.
There are 4 strategies base on 4 indicators, custom, and not-custom ones. So basically instead of 4 different EAs running in 4 different charts with the same 4 indicators each... The client asked me to optimise them by putting them all in one to run 4 into 1 EAs in the same chart.
EVERYTHING is the same. They are tested as well that they are the same. They open the same trades, on the same moments. Nothing is changed 100%. The only thing I did (for this part of the debugging, because obviously I had a lot more to do before that) is to copy functions and code. And I seperated all different strategies with an "if" as input
input bool strategy1enabled = true; etc... so he/she can disable/enable individual strategies if wanted.
everything works BUT....
All but 1 strategies, does not show the Comment on the trades.
All 4 use the same Buy/Sell/CloseOrder functions so I just input the values to keep the code shorter.
//---
bool OrdClose (int ticket_number, double lt, int slp)
{
return OrderClose(ticket_number,lt,iClose(NULL,0,0),slp,clrViolet);
}
//---
int Buy(double lt, int slp, int slss, int tpft, string cmt, int mgc)
{
return OrderSend(NULL,OP_BUY,lt,Ask,slp,Ask-slss*Point,Ask+tpft*Point,cmt,mgc,0,clrDarkBlue);
}
//---
int Sell(double lt, int slp, int slss, int tpft, string cmt, int mgc)
{
return OrderSend(NULL,OP_SELL,lt,Bid,slp,Bid+slss*Point,Bid-tpft*Point,cmt,mgc,0,clrDarkRed);
}
1 strategy just refuses to put comment. Any ideas why? When used seperated WITH THE SAME CODE and the EXACT SAME functions... comment shows...
EDIT:
2021.05.04 18:30:48.670 The_Big_Holla_v1_8_EA CADJPY,H1: open #85710545 buy 0.06 CADJPY at 88.755 sl: 88.655 tp: 88.955 ok
2021.05.04 18:30:48.462 The_Big_Holla_v1_8_EA CADJPY,H1: Holla v4.9 || GreedInjectionMode
2021.05.04 18:30:48.462 The_Big_Holla_v1_8_EA CADJPY,H1: Holla v4.9 || GreedInjectionMode
Comment is passed properly and checked before being passed to function and before OrderSend within function:
The function:
int Sell(double lt, int slp, int slss, int tpft, string cmt, int mgc)
{
Print(cmt);
return OrderSend(NULL,OP_SELL,lt,Bid,slp,Bid+slss*Point,Bidtpft*Point,cmt,mgc,0,clrDarkRed);
}
How the function is called:
Print(EACommentInj);
ticket_val_inj = Buy(lotsizeInj,slippageInj,stoplossInj,takeprofitInj,EACommentInj,MagicInj);
This is how it is initialised and it NEVER changes. It is mentioned only where it is passed. Where I showed you above.
const string EACommentInjGreed = "Holla v4.9 || GreedInjectionMode Greed Mode";
Although this is undocumented, the "string comment=NULL" parameter of the trade function OrderSend() in MQL4 is limited to 31 characters. If this limit is exceeded then the string is rejected as a whole and treated as NULL.
In your code, just before the OrderSend() function, add the following line:
cmt=StringSubstr(cmt,0,31);
So I want to open trades depending on multiple criteria with my EA... Doesn't really matter TBH...
The problem is that EAs run in one window. So naturally, I'd like for an EA to open assess conditions and open all the trades within one chart. Everything's fine except...
Broker won't allow an EA that runs in a chart open a trade on a different one.... It is surely that. I eliminated any other case.
Inputs just for this example:
input double LotSize = 0.01;
input int Slippage = 10;
input double StopLoss = 1000.0;
input double TakeProfit = 1000.0;
input const string SymbolA = "EURUSD";
input const string SymbolB = "GBPUSD";
The commands I use (I have them copy-pasted from another EA that works just fine so I am certain they work as well, plus I used extreme TP/SL to surpass any restrictions that brokers might have) :
TicketA = OrderSend(SymbolA,OP_SELL,LotSize,Bid,Slippage,Bid+StopLoss*Point,Bid-TakeProfit*Point,EAComment,OrderTicket(),0,clrDarkRed);
Sleep(1000);
TicketB = OrderSend(SymbolB,OP_BUY,LotSize,Ask,Slippage,Ask-StopLoss*Point,Ask+TakeProfit*Point,EAComment,OrderTicket(),0,clrDarkBlue);
Error (EURUSD one opens normal as the EA runs in the EURUSD chart):
2020.12.18 01:01:45.318 '22644076': order buy market 0.01 GBPUSD sl: 1.21670 tp: 1.23670
2020.12.18 01:01:45.528 '22644076': order buy 0.01 GBPUSD opening at market sl: 1.21670 tp: 1.23670 failed [Invalid S/L or T/P]
Any suggestion how can I fix/bypass this?
Thanks in advance!
Obviously, you have to set a different open price, stop-loss, and take-profit for another symbol. So, if you are calling for the current (SymbolA) this sell:
TicketA = OrderSend(SymbolA,OP_SELL,LotSize,Bid,Slippage,Bid+StopLoss*Point,Bid-TakeProfit*Point,EAComment,OrderTicket(),0,clrDarkRed);
Then for a SymbolB (a different symbol), you have to first construct the price values:
double Ask_B = SymbolInfoDouble(SymbolB, SYMBOL_ASK);
double Point_B = SymbolInfoDouble(SymbolB, SYMBOL_POINT);
int Digits_B = SymbolInfoInteger(SymbolB, SYMBOL_DIGITS);
double SL_B = NormalizeDouble(Ask_B - StopLoss * Point_B, Digits_B);
double TP_B = NormalizeDouble(Ask_B + StopLoss * Point_B, Digits_B);
And only then call something like this:
TicketB = OrderSend(SymbolB,OP_BUY,LotSize,Ask_B,Slippage,SL_B,TP_B,EAComment,OrderTicket(),0,clrDarkBlue);
I have an EA with closes a trade on button click
//void CloseCurrentTrade(). It's called after successfull OrderSelect
int orderType = OrderType();
double price;
if (orderType == OP_BUY)
price = return MarketInfo(OrderSymbol(), MODE_BID);
else if (orderType == OP_SELL)
price = return MarketInfo(OrderSymbol(), MODE_ASK);
else
return;
int slippage = 20;
bool closed = OrderClose(OrderTicket(), OrderLots(), price, slippage);
if (closed)
return;
int lastError = GetLastError();
Sometimes it closes the trade and sometimes it returns error #129 (Invalid price). I can't figure out why. Most of the cases people just misuse bid/ask or don't have enouth slippage. I've try to use slippage up to 200, still the same error. Some EA's just try to close it several times (and it looks like a hack for me), but it does not help as well. There are some mentions that you need to call RefreshRates() before bid/ask, but documentaion says that you don't need to do that for MarketInfo.
I've run out of ideas what it could be. Why it can happen and how to avoid that? I'm testing it on FXCM Demo (if it is the case).
First make sure that you've selected the order properly, and try to use OrderClosePrice where possible(this will eliminate the need for checking the OP_SELL/OP_BUY)
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
//| Close the latest order for this current symbol |
//+------------------------------------------------------------------+
void CloseCurrentTrade()
{
for(int i=OrdersTotal()-1;i>=0;i--)
{
if(!OrderSelect(i,SELECT_BY_POS,MODE_TRADES)) continue;
if(OrderSymbol()!=Symbol()) continue;
if(OrderMagicNumber()!=MagicNum) continue; // if there is no magic number set, then no need for this(manual orders)
if(OrderType()>OP_SELL) continue;
if(!OrderClose(OrderTicket(),OrderLots(),OrderClosePrice(),Slippage))
Print("Error in Closing the Order, Error : ",ErrorDescription(GetLastError()));
break; // assuming you want to close the latest trade only, exit the order closing loop
}
}
Also note that your broker might have restrictions on how far the closing price must be from the Order Opened price and other levels(sl/tp), in order to close an order. Refer here
Print and compare Ask/Bid && price when closed!=true. Beware that MarketInfo mode data is stored at Ask/Bid predefined variables already, so you can eliminate that if you OrderSelect in current symbol.
Trying to add a StopLoss to my open market positions which also takes into account my brokers stoplevel. I have set this to add a breakeven stop loss when my trade gets to 100 points in profit.
This is the code - but its completely ignoring any order modification during my back testing.
OK this is now what I have so far, one for loop for the buy, one for the sell. I;ve also declared the "BuyMod" & "SellMod" to true as was suggested in pervious answers, as well as Normalzing prices in the OrderModify signature.
/*Breakeven Order Modification*/
bool BuyMod = true;
bool SellMod = true;
for(int b = OrdersTotal()-1;b>=0;b--)
{
if(OrderSelect(b,SELECT_BY_POS,MODE_TRADES))
{
double aBidPrice = MarketInfo(Symbol(),MODE_BID);
double anOpenPrice = OrderOpenPrice();
double aNewTpPrice = OrderTakeProfit();
double aCurrentSL = OrderStopLoss();
double aNewSLPrice = anOpenPrice;
double pnlPoints = (aBidPrice - anOpenPrice)/_Point;
double stopPoints = (aBidPrice - aNewSLPrice)/_Point;
int stopLevel = int(MarketInfo(Symbol(),MODE_STOPLEVEL));
int aTicket = OrderTicket();
if(OrderType() == OP_BUY)
if(stopPoints >= stopLevel)
if(aTicket > 0)
if(pnlPoints >= breakeven)
if(aNewSLPrice != aCurrentSL)
{
BuyMod = OrderModify(OrderTicket(),OrderOpenPrice(),NormalizeDouble(aNewSLPrice,Digits),NormalizeDouble(aNewTpPrice,Digits),0,buycolor);
SendMail("Notification of Order Modification for Ticket#"+IntegerToString(OrderTicket(),10),"Good news! Order Ticket#"+IntegerToString(OrderTicket(),10)+"has been changed to breakeven");
}
}
}
for(int s = OrdersTotal()-1; s>=0; s--)
{
if(OrderSelect(s,SELECT_BY_POS,MODE_TRADES))
{
double anAskPrice = MarketInfo(Symbol(),MODE_ASK);
double anOpenPrice = OrderOpenPrice();
double aNewTpPrice = OrderTakeProfit();
double aCurrentSL = OrderStopLoss();
double aNewSLPrice = anOpenPrice;
double pnlPoints = (anOpenPrice - anAskPrice)/_Point;
double stopPoints = (aNewSLPrice - anAskPrice)/_Point;
int stopLevel = int(MarketInfo(Symbol(),MODE_STOPLEVEL));
int aTicket = OrderTicket();
if(OrderType()== OP_SELL)
if(stopPoints >= stopLevel)
if(pnlPoints >= breakeven)
if(aNewSLPrice != aCurrentSL)
if(aTicket > 0)
{
SellMod = OrderModify(OrderTicket(),OrderOpenPrice(),NormalizeDouble(aNewSLPrice,Digits),NormalizeDouble(aNewTpPrice,Digits),0,sellcolor);
SendMail("Notification of Order Modification for Ticket#"+IntegerToString(OrderTicket(),10),"Good news! Order Ticket#"+IntegerToString(OrderTicket(),10)+"has been changed to breakeven");
}
}
}
This code will not work due to several reasons:
First:The function-call signature of OrderModify() is wrong.
You might want to know, that OrderModify() call-signature requires as per MQL4 documentation to include also an OrderExpiration value in the call, even though the Order is currently not a pending order any more.
Check the documentation and the IDE tooltip, which helps one remind the order of the function call parameters.
Second:The other, less-visible reasons could be reported by GetLastError() after the OrderModify() function call returns a False as an indication of failure.