Hi Mike,
Does this have any merit? It does not look into the future. It's still a work
in progress. Is there anything you would change? Thanks for your help.
...
...
...
///////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Test run to determine value of highs and lows //
for (bar = 0; bar < BarCount; bar++) {
if (lookingForHigh) {
if (bigHigh[bar]) {
lookingForHigh = False; // now looking for low
highs++;
}
} else {
if (smallLow[bar]) {
lookingForHigh = True; // now looking for high
lows++;
}
}
}
//////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Value of highs and lows have been determined //
for (bar = 0; bar < BarCount; bar++) {
if (lookingForHigh) {
if (bigHigh[bar]) {
lookingForHigh = False; // now looking for low
PlotText("HH" + highs, bar -1, High[bar] + dist[bar], colorRed);
highs--;
}
} else {
if (smallLow[bar]) {
lookingForHigh = True; // now looking for high
PlotText("LL" + lows, bar -1, Low[bar] - dist[bar], colorGreen);
lows--;
}
}
}
--- In [email protected], "Mike" <sfclimb...@...> wrote:
>
> Only if you're willing to look into the future, and as new values develop on
> the right of the graph, those values already printed will change.
>
> highs = LastValue(Cum(bigHigh));
>
> ...
> if (bigHigh[bar]) {
> lookingForHigh = false; // now looking for low
> PlotText("HH" + highs, bar, High[bar], colorGreen);
> highs--;
> }
> ...
>
> Mike
>
> --- In [email protected], "booker_1324" <booker_1324@> wrote:
> >
> > Mike, just one more question. The labels from left to right are LL1, LL2,
> > LL3 and so on. Is there a way for the labels to be reversed to read from
> > the right to left starting with LL1 and HH1?
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "Mike" <sfclimbers@> wrote:
> > >
> > > Sure, just initialize a variable to track the number of highs then use
> > > PlotText to write out the count. Do the same for lows.
> > >
> > > e.g. (untested)
> > >
> > > highs = 1;
> > >
> > > ...
> > > if (bigHigh[bar]) {
> > > lookingForHigh = false; // now looking for low
> > > PlotText("HH" + highs, bar, High[bar], colorGreen);
> > > highs++;
> > > }
> > > ...
> > >
> > > Mike
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], "booker_1324" <booker_1324@> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Nice code Mike, to take this a step farther, is it posible to attach a
> > > > label to each HHV and LLV such as HH1, HH2, HH3, LL1, LL2, and LL3
> > > > without referencing future quotes?
> > > >
> > > > --- In [email protected], "Mike" <sfclimbers@> wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > What makes you think that you are changing the step size? From what I
> > > > > see, you're still advancing a single bar at a time.
> > > > >
> > > > > bigHigh = high >Ref (hhv(high,50),-1);
> > > > > smallLow = low < Ref (llv(low,50),-1);
> > > > > lookingForHigh = true;
> > > > >
> > > > > for (bar = 0; bar < BarCount; bar++) {
> > > > > if (lookingForHigh) {
> > > > > if (bigHigh[bar]) {
> > > > > lookingForHigh = false; // now looking for low
> > > > > }
> > > > > } else {
> > > > > if (smallLow[bar]) {
> > > > > lookingForHigh = true;
> > > > > }
> > > > > }
> > > > > }
> > > > >
> > > > > Mike
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In [email protected], "Markus Witzler" <funnybiz@> wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hello,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I wonder if I can step thru a loop where the step size is being
> > > > > > computed WITHIN the loop.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > An example:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I want the loop to check for every bar until high >Ref
> > > > > > (hhv(high,50),-1).
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From THAT bar on, the loop should check if low < Ref
> > > > > > (llv(low,50),-1) occured.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Say, the first condition is true on bar 50, the loop should
> > > > > > afterwards start to check for the second ccondition from bar 51
> > > > > > until that condition is fullfilled, say on bar 80.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > From THAT bar on, it again should check for the first condition etc.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The thing is that I can´t tell the loop the step size in ADVANCE
> > > > > > and it may differ over the whole data range, depending on WHEN the
> > > > > > condition beign checked for is true.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Any ideas on this?
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Markus
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
