alf44
2,025 posts
msg #37962
- Ignore alf44 |
9/14/2005 4:37:51 PM
nikoschopen,
Thanks for the effort...but that's still not it !
I kinda like the "flag/pennant" attempt but this filter you've written is effectively just a wide range bar followed by 4 narrow range bars that all sit within the range of the wide range bar.
An interesting and well written scan but still NOT what I was looking for !
I like the idea of using RumpledOne's "logic" method to achieve the Either/Or idea. Unfortunately, I don't seem to be capable of figuring out how to do it. Or, if it CAN be done. Not yet anyway. I'll keep trying and hope others will as well.
alf44
|
nikoschopen
2,824 posts
msg #37964
- Ignore nikoschopen |
9/14/2005 7:11:23 PM
Well, I've called it flag/pennant, but technically speaking it ain't what I claimed to be. It's rather what you have correctly described, a horizontal range within the length of the wide bar. Perhaps I have misunderstood your original question. What I gathered was that
(1) a "Measuring Bar" whose High is HIGHER than EITHER the Open OR Close for EACH of the subsequent 4 days
(2) a "Measuring Bar" whose Low is LOWER than EITHER the Open OR Close for EACH of the subsequent 4 days
(3) Open OR Close of the subsequent 4 days falls within the High/Low Range of the "Measuring Bar Day"
However, you seem to imply that there might be something more here than just these 3 premises. What am I missing? I should also mention that you can tweak the range in which the 4 subsequent days can fluctuate, say, from "0.96 to 0.99" to whatever other values you prefer.
On the other hand, if you must include OR operand wouldn't something like this would satisfy it?
|
nikoschopen
2,824 posts
msg #37965
- Ignore nikoschopen |
9/14/2005 7:15:14 PM
The above filter is just an example & not another solution (sic?)
|
alf44
2,025 posts
msg #37968
- Ignore alf44 |
9/14/2005 11:03:45 PM
nikoschopen,
It looks great...I have absolutely NO idea how it relates to what I posted here about...but it LOOKS great !
alf44 :8^)
|
nikoschopen
2,824 posts
msg #37971
- Ignore nikoschopen |
9/15/2005 1:18:38 AM
I gladly return your compliment. But with your half-ass input with only a vague description, let alone even an incomplete filter for us to glean at, what the hell did you expect? Not even the venerable TheRumpledOne whom you addressed would be obliged to take your request in earnest. By the way, I don't think anyone here has the time to speak tongue-in-cheek.
|
TheRumpledOne
6,411 posts
msg #37972
- Ignore TheRumpledOne |
9/15/2005 2:10:48 AM
glgene 8/2/2005 9:23:26 AM
I had written this earlier, but somehow it disappeared?? Anyway, here is my question: Can you use "IF-THEN-ELSE" logic in SF scripting?
You can implement "IF-THEN-ELSE" logic using and/or.
If then is only false when A -> B is false.
A B
= =
T T = T
T F = F
F T = T
F F = F
So if A is true and B is false then
If A then B is false, otherwise it is true.
Does that help?
|
nikoschopen
2,824 posts
msg #37973
- Ignore nikoschopen |
9/15/2005 4:30:06 AM
Rump, didn't Cegis write something to the following effect in illustrating this point...
set{if, count(close is above open,1)}
set{then, if * 1}
set{else, 1 - then}
etc, etc...
|
alf44
2,025 posts
msg #37974
- Ignore alf44 |
9/15/2005 11:27:56 AM
nikoschopen,
Why the hostility ? I've said thanks for the help/effort.
As for my..."half-ass input with only a vague description"...I really don't know HOW I could be more specific in describing the basic premise. I've actually made 2 attempts at describing it. Maybe if you re-read them it will be more clear. If not I would be glad to elaborate further.
I haven't offered up a filter for you (and others)..."to glean at"...because, as I've said...I seem to be unable (ie. too dumb) to come up with anything that takes into account the "either/or" nature of the set-up. Sure I could post a simple "4 days whose Range is inside the Range of the Range 5 days ago"...but that's NOT what I have in mind nor is it what I've described here in this thread.
Again, I thank you for all your effort in my request for some help and would appreciate anything further you are willing to offer.
alf44
|
nikoschopen
2,824 posts
msg #37976
- Ignore nikoschopen |
9/15/2005 2:49:17 PM
I've realized over the years that one must carefully choose one's words to get one's message across, especially via electronica means. Otherwise, one can easily find oneself down and out in the land of misunderstanding. As such, I seem to have misinterpreted the nature of your previous post.
As a marginal contributor, if at all, it's not my place to tell anyone what to do. However, I think it's fair to say that one mustn't expect others to simply write the entire filter for oneself. At the very least, one must avoid the impression of being just another curious bystander who has only a placard that reads "YES!!!" or "NO!!!" Even if one feels not entirely up to par when writing a filter (excluding Cegis, aren't we all?) one should, for the benefit of others, clarify what is not to his liking and what one feels needs to be strengthened. In my opinion, you're articulate enough to get that point across.
|
alf44
2,025 posts
msg #37977
- Ignore alf44 |
9/15/2005 4:07:51 PM
WHATEVER !
You wanna help me out with the filter syntax...fine !
You don't wanna help me out with the filter syntax...that's fine too !
I'm not here to argue and I'm certainly not here to defend myself for asking for some help !
Regards,
alf44 (aka. "just another curious bystander")
|