Thanks, Mike, that's a good workaround. Hopefully TJ will add native support
in future release.

On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Mike <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>
> Interesting.
>
> If you don't find a more obvious way, you could have your JScript get at
> the value by having the OLE object first run a scan on an AFL script like
> the following (untested, assumes scan on current symbol for last 1 bars):
>
> Buy = Sell = 0;
> watchListNum = CategoryFind("My List Name", categoryWatchList);
>
> fh = fopen("c:\\temp\\listnum.txt", "w");
>
> if (fh) {
> fputs("" + watchListNum, fh);
> fclose(fh);
> }
>
> Then have your JScript read from the file to get your filter value before
> running what you really wanted to run in the first place.
>
> Mike
>
>
> --- In [email protected] <amibroker%40yahoogroups.com>, Mark Hike
> <markh...@...> wrote:
> >
> > I am talking about OLE object for Analysis, not AFL. CategoryGetName() is
> > not available in OLE.
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Sep 25, 2009 at 6:40 AM, bistoman73 <bistoma...@...> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > you could find the actual number of the watchlist that you want to use
> > > looking in all the watchlist (i=1 to 100 or 1000) and finding which one
> has
> > > the name, given by CategoryGetName( categoryWatchlist, i) , equal to
> the one
> > > you want
> > >
> > > hope it could help
> > >
> > > Bisto
> > >
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected] <amibroker%40yahoogroups.com><amibroker%
> 40yahoogroups.com>, Mark Hike
> > > <markhike@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Folks,
> > > >
> > > > I am working to automate an exploration on a watchlist using JScript.
> > > > It seems the OLD Analysis object only accept watchlist number as
> filter,
> > > not
> > > > watchlist name.
> > > > I only have the watchlist name and its index number can change any
> time
> > > > since I keep adding and deleting watchlists all the time.
> > > >
> > > > Is there any workaround to get the filter work with watchlist name?
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > >
> > > > - Mark
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
>
>  
>

Reply via email to