In WL6.9, TrendLineValue(int bar, string trendLineName) gave you the value of a manually-drawn, named trendline.
This was fantastic for ad-hoc signaling, but it suffered from the fact that it could only return the TrendLineValue in a Chart Window, i.e., you couldn't get the values for all symbols in a multi-symbol backtest or in the S. Monitor. (We worked around it by saving the T/L data to a file with one script, and reading it with another.)
1. Allow naming drawing objects - at least TrendLines
2. Save a named TrendLine data in a way such that it can be recalled in virtually any time scale. (We just need to save the slope and a point.)
3. Create the TrendLineValue() function - and add a log overload.
This was fantastic for ad-hoc signaling, but it suffered from the fact that it could only return the TrendLineValue in a Chart Window, i.e., you couldn't get the values for all symbols in a multi-symbol backtest or in the S. Monitor. (We worked around it by saving the T/L data to a file with one script, and reading it with another.)
1. Allow naming drawing objects - at least TrendLines
2. Save a named TrendLine data in a way such that it can be recalled in virtually any time scale. (We just need to save the slope and a point.)
3. Create the TrendLineValue() function - and add a log overload.
Rename
QUOTE:
3. Create the TrendLineValue() function - and add a log overload.
Is this going to be a "virtual" function you could override or inherit its class from?
QUOTE:
it could only return the TrendLineValue in a Chart Window, i.e., you couldn't get the values for all symbols in a multi-symbol backtest
That makes sense if this is a "manually drawn" trend line. In order to apply it across a dataset, it would have to be automatically drawn. Is that what this proposal is about?
If so, then the function really does need to be "virtual" because users would want to be able to override it with something of their own design. I'm visualizing a datatype base class that provides graphical support that one could inherit from. Or does this sound too complicated? Perhaps it's not too complicated if WL includes a useful example datatype that inherits from this base class, which the user can build from or modify.
How is this proposal different from https://www.wealth-lab.com/Discussion/Trading-from-the-Streaming-Chart-7930 ? It sounds like this proposal is a subset of the link above, or is my perception wrong?
Let's not get things mixed up. This proposal is about interacting with MANUALLY DRAWN objects on the chart. It includes new functionality to be able to NAME the manually drawn objects so they can be interacted with from within Strategy code.
Your Response
Post
Edit Post
Login is required