Tomasz, I anticipated the use of more static arrays in my efforts to speed up my AFL. That was another one of my reasons for adding more RAM and looking to use W7 64 bit. RAM is the cheapest and easiest solution to more speed for me.
You make a point, and perhaps there is some validity to using multiple charts as opposed to a single AA. Note my last comments to Herman about this possibility. Using AA does limit one to a single other process. Having multiple charts to do the computations gives a lot more flexibility in dealing with multiple timeframes with different history requirements. Quick AFL bars would be optimized for each chart. This could reduce the overall computational load. If on some future release, you enable multiple charts to execute on multiple cores, then this would provide a method for an AFL programmer to take advantage of parallel processing in a high level AFL way. Perhaps, I am in error in talking about charts in indicator mode all the time -- just because it is what I am familiar with. Perhaps there is already or could be another mode for AFL specifically to run on a time basis rather than event basis (other than AA), for solving problems like we have been discussing. I really am open to all ideas, even though I may not "get it" right-away at times. I am just brainstorming the possibilities in a simple high level model that I can understand. Thanks for listening, Dennis On Aug 3, 2010, at 8:35 PM, Tomasz Janeczko wrote: > > > Hello, > > There are some drawbacks of using AA to process and store results in static > variables > a) static variables consume memory > b) you are locking AA window so you can't use it for something else > > Best regards, > Tomasz Janeczko > amibroker.com > > On 2010-08-04 02:25, Tomasz Janeczko wrote: >> >> Hello, >> >> Quite frankly I was saying that many users abuse chart formulas for doing >> stuff that should be placed elsewhere. >> I was also recommending to use AA/run-every to process offline instead of >> putting all code into charts >> long time ago, last time it was here: >> http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/message/151513 >> >> and here: >> http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/AmiBroker-at/message/5131 >> >> but unfortunately no one seemed to be listening. >> >> Best regards, >> Tomasz Janeczko >> amibroker.com >> >> On 2010-08-04 01:44, Herman wrote: >>> >>> The code doesn't execute faster in the AA. You are off-loading processing >>> from the indicator to the AA, i.e. let the indicator do the plotting and >>> let the AA do the calculations once a second. This is fast enough because >>> the only thing that changes on your chart is the last bar and you can keep >>> that "live" by plotting a single candle indicator. >>> >>> a very simple example: >>> >>> AA code, set to Current Symbol, All Quotations, Run-Every to 1 sec, and run >>> SCAN: >>> >>> Buy=Sell=Short=Cover=0; >>> StaticVarSet( "BBTop", BBandTop( C, 20, 2 ) ); >>> StaticVarSet( "BBBot", BBandBot( C, 20, 2 ) ); >>> >>> Indicator code: >>> >>> Plot( C, "", 1, 64 ); // this plot is live >>> Plot( StaticVarGet( "BBTop" ), "BBTop", colorBlue, styleLine ); // this >>> updates 1/sec >>> Plot( StaticVarGet( "BBBot" ), "BBBot", colorBlue, styleLine ); >>> >>> On my computer the Indicator part executes 3x faster plotting speeds up the >>> Indicator code 3x, AA 0.9 mSec, Indicator 0.3 mSec. Of course the gains >>> would be much greater with complex code. >>> >>> If anyone sees something wrong with the AA idea please speak up. It seems >>> to be too good to be true, usually there is something wrong when things >>> look too good ;-) >>> I am surprised no one critiqued this idea. There must be a negative side to >>> this... anyone? >>> >>> Herman >>> >>> >>> > Herman, >>> >>> > Can you explain a little more about the indicator code vs >>> > AA code... is it identical...? I'm not entirely clear why >>> > it executes so much faster via the AA than an indicator in a chart. >>> >>> > Many Thanks >>> >>> > Rob >>> >>> >>> >>> > ------------------------------------ >>> >>> > **** 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/ >>> > (submissions sent via other channels won't be considered) >>> >>> > For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG: >>> > http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/ >>> >>> > Yahoo! Groups Links >>> >>> >>> >> > > >
