I work for a multi billion dollar company that has nothing to do with  
programming.....and it used to be a bigger company....
 
alas, I like AFL.......
 
can somebody loan me some money to pay my taxes on my trading profits using 
 afl.....????
 
or suggestions of which country to run to....
 
 
 
 
In a message dated 1/9/2010 8:21:20 P.M. Central Standard Time,  
[email protected] writes:



LOL. Who cares what you  believe? You cherry picked a sentence of mine that 
was objectively critical  and ignored other sentences where I implicitly 
acknowledged positive aspects  of AFL. I have no more time for this silliness. 
 
____________________________________
From: Tomasz Janeczko <[email protected]> 
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 03:09:55 +0100
To: <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: [amibroker] A computer science related question on  the AFL 
Language


Hello,

> I use your product because it is one of the  few that offer decent built 
in drawing capabilities (pixel level)
Oh  really? I thought that every language has pixel level drawing, isn't it 
 ?

With regards to "some positive attributes" that you mention you  surely 
mean your great sentence that says  "AFL is a deeply flawed  language". In my 
understanding is plain unjustified bashing nothing  more.

And you are once again wrong in your conclusion.  I  appreciate the 
feedback. 
Especially the feedback from ordinary  person,
from the beginner and from anybody else with one exception.  
With exception to persons who claim in first sentence that they work for  
multi-billion-dollar institutions. It is pathetic. If somebody starts with  
something like that he/she automatically loses all credibility in my  eyes.

Best regards,
Tomasz Janeczko
amibroker.com

On  2010-01-10 02:44, Potato Soup wrote:  
 
A very simple question to answer. I use your product because it is one  of 
the few that offer decent built in drawing capabilities (pixel level).  How 
much money I or my employers have is largely irrelevant, all tools are  
considered for the job.

I'm sorry that you don't want to take some  constructive criticism from 
other people in the field. That is unfortunate  for your customers. I, nor 
anyone else has suggested that you failed in your  original endeavor, or that 
AB/AFL is unworthy of any recognition. If you  re-read my original posts 
you'll see that I mention that it has some  positive attributes. But if you 
expect everyone to blindly praise you and  suppress constructive criticism or 
advice than you will be disappointed. The  best software takes the best ideas 
from everyone and synthesizes them  together. I still have hope that AB can 
someday be the  best.

Cheers.


 
____________________________________
 From: Tomasz Janeczko _<[email protected]>_ 
(mailto:[email protected]) 
To: [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) 
Sent: Sat, January 9, 2010 8:37:17  PM
Subject: Re: [amibroker]  A computer science related question on the AFL 
Language



Hello,

If you are so great and working for all those  multi-billion institutions I 
am wondering what are you doing here,
using  so cheap and "flawed" system as you wrote in your original post. 
Surely for  that amount of money that you have in hand
you could hire best  programmers in the world and write your own 
super-trouper language and all  that stuff. 

So please give me a break. I wrote AFL for myself back  in 1995 because I 
need tool for my own purposes. I decided to offer it for  others and some 
people liked it. That's whole story. If you do not like it  then search 
elsewhere or write your own for your multi-billion  institution.  And no thanks 
I 
do not need your advice.

Best  regards,
Tomasz Janeczko
_amibroker.com_ (http://amibroker.com/) 

On 2010-01-10 02:24, Potato  Soup wrote:  
Sorry for adding my "twisted" opinion, which only has experience building  
trading systems for multi-billion dollar institutions.

And Python's  math modules that are implemented in Fortran and C are not 
"slow" In fact  there are Python math implementations that run on GPUs. Python 
as a  language can be optimized to be as fast as anything. 

I'm more than  happy to offer help if the AB author needs assistance 
adopting more modern  and "twisted" technologies. My goal in offering the 
feedback 
was to help  improve the product. 

Cheers. 
 
____________________________________
From: Tomasz Janeczko _<[email protected]>_ 
(mailto:[email protected])   
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 2010 02:17:31 +0100
To: _<[email protected]>_ (mailto:[email protected]) 
Subject: Re: [amibroker] A computer science related question  on the AFL 
Language


Hello,

Precisely. 

AFL is designed to be able  to express trading system rules / indicators in 
easy and short form and to  be fast. That's all. It is intended to be easy 
to use and fast thanks to  array processing that general-purpose languages 
lack. Just compare Traders  Tips formulas published on S&C site for various 
platforms (some of  them using so called "standard" laguages) and you will 
quickly find which  formula is the shortest and easiest to understand. That 
speaks for itself  and has more weight that sombody's twisted opinion.

If one wants  full blown C++ - one can use it - just write your code in 
C++, compile it  as a plugin and that's it.

Python/Lua and all that stuff are slow  compared to AFL array processing. 
And as far as object-oriented  programming is considered, most people are not 
comfortable with it (and  belive it or not but most people are NOT 
programmers). I can tell that  because I hear a lot of feedback from users.

Best  regards,
Tomasz Janeczko
amibroker.com

On 2010-01-09 14:57,  Prashanth wrote:  
Its not a question of whether  it can be improved or not. Its a question of 
how user friendly it is.  Most traders are not programmers and hence 
complex coding is out of  question for vast majority. Its this group that 
appreciates the easiness  of coding in AFL as compared to other languages which 
may 
hold more  potential but can be much more difficult to learn.
 
I believe TJ has simpliefied  as much as possible and maybe during that 
simplification process, there  were some sacrifices that were done. Unless one 
is a hard core  programmer, I feel AFL more than meets every specification. 
For those  who like to use more tools, ADK is always there to use and create 
 outside of AB what they desire to achieve.
 
Cheers
 
Prashanth
 

-----  Original Message ----- 
From:  _Potato  Soup_ (mailto:[email protected])  
To:  _AmiBroker (Discussion  List)_ (mailto:[email protected])  
Sent:  Saturday, January 09, 2010 19:15 PM
Subject:  Re: [amibroker] A computer science related question on the AFL  
Language


Why design one when Python is free, as is Lua, Squirrel  and other easy 
scripting languages? I have built many trading systems  for hedge funds and big 
banks. Never once considered building a  language with it. 

Sounds like you think AFL can't be improved?  From a language perspective 
AFL has some good ideas and concepts but  uneven execution. A lot of things 
feel incrementally added, whether  they were or not I don't know. 
 
____________________________________
From: "J Paul Buffon" _<[email protected]>_ (mailto:[email protected])   
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 2010 08:34:37 -0500
To: _<[email protected]>_ (mailto:[email protected]) 
Subject: RE: [amibroker] A computer science related  question on the AFL 
Language



Well,  you should design one!  As far as I am concerned, elegant and  great 
price/quality ratio, the best in the market in that bracket.  Part of my 
tool box and achieved north of 70% last year with  it. 
JP   
 
 
From: [email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected])   
[_mailto:[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) ]  On 
Behalf Of Potato Soup
Sent: 01/09/2010 8:24  AM
To: AmiBroker (Discussion List)
Subject: Re:  [amibroker] A computer science related question on the AFL  
Language

 
 
 
AFL is an imperative language primarily  with a dose of vector processing 
features that enable the terseness  that you talk about. I would not describe 
it as an OO language in any  way, just because it has OO bindings or 
provides access to objects. If  you can not write an object then the OO syntax 
introduced in the  backtester is syntactic sugar at best. I also wouldn't say 
it has  anywhere near the power of C or C++ just because it offers some 
syntax  similarities. Those languages derive their power mainly from their  
ability to access memory directly, and at the OS' discretion this  means 
writing 
directly to hardware memory maps. Of course C++ takes  things much further. 
But AFL doesn't give you anywhere the expressive  data structure creation 
abilities that a true imperative or OO  language would. 

Personally I feel AFL is a deeply flawed  language that mixes constructs 
from Basic and C at very superficial  levels. It provides its power from 
underneath the hood, not at the  true language level. 

I would pay a lot of money for AB with  Python as its language, using NumPy 
as the fast math and numerical  processing underpinning. 

This is not to say that AFL doesn't  have elegant concepts or advantages. 
It is just not a well designed  language from the ground up. 

-----Original  Message-----
From: "cascade3891" <[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) 
>
Date:  Sat, 09 Jan 2010 08:26:59 
To: <[email protected]_ (mailto:[email protected]) >
Subject:  [amibroker] A computer science related question on the AFL  
Language

Hi Amibroker community,

I have specific  questions about the AFL language, regarding where it 
stands within the  computer language spectrum(s) and what effect that has on  
speed/performance, agility and modularity as well as its accuracy for  
readability and unit testing purposes. 

I know that AFL is not  an object oriented programming language for the 
main part (however it  does have some OO features like COM), does this make AFL 
primarily a  functional programming language, a bit like OCaml?? 

Are  functional programming languages better for financial trading  
applications? Where there is a need for speed, and quality stable  code?
AFL seems a lot brief in terms of the amount of code that you  have to 
write (terse) ... this makes it more attractive for reading  over and checking 
the code, and for backtesting purposes. 

I  notice also that with AFL you don't have to declare data types, again  
making it much more efficient. 

Is there a drawback to using an  OO code for financial trading 
systems/applications?

I quite  like the speed and terseness of the AFL language actually, and 
also  since it has many similarities to C. But would there be any  limitations 
to not being able to define classes and objects?  

I'm not an experience programmer so sorry if I sound green.  

Anyone have any ideas on Tomasz' original design philosophy  when he set 
out creating the AFL language? to me it seems like he  wanted to keep the 
power and similarities to C/C++ given the similar  syntactical structure, 
whether because he knows that language well, or  because he wanted it to be 
able 
to have the same sort of power, but he  also seems to have kept in mind the 
needs for performance and  stability, terseness for backtesting/speed 
purposes, and maybe also  b/c most traders need to pick up the language, hence 
trying to make  AFL easier to grasp.  











------------------------------------

****  IMPORTANT PLEASE READ ****
This group is for the discussion between  users only.
This is *NOT* technical support channel.

TO GET  TECHNICAL SUPPORT send an e-mail directly to 
SUPPORT {at}  amibroker.com

TO SUBMIT SUGGESTIONS please use FEEDBACK CENTER  at
_http://www.amibroker.com/feedback/_ (http://www.amibroker.com/feedback/) 
(submissions  sent via other channels won't be considered)

For NEW RELEASE  ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
_http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/_ (http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/) 

Yahoo!  Groups Links

























Reply via email to