question re time syntax

nonetheless · 2020-04-13T20:58:03+00:00

To specify an algo’s active time I have normally used time >= 080000 and time = 8 and hour <21 The two seemed to be interchangeable, until just now when I found an algo that returns completely different results for time as opposed to hour. Do they mean different things then? Couldn’t find an answer in the manual.

Viewing 12 posts - 1 through 12 (of 12 total)

Author

Posts
04/13/2020 at 9:58 PM #125997 quote
nonetheless
Participant

Master
To specify an algo’s active time I have normally used
```
time >= 080000 and time <210000
```
Then I got it in my head that i could save a lot of zeros by using this instead:
```
hour >= 8 and hour <21
```
The two seemed to be interchangeable, until just now when I found an algo that returns completely different results for time as opposed to hour.

Do they mean different things then? Couldn’t find an answer in the manual.
04/13/2020 at 10:00 PM #126000 quote

robertogozzi
Moderator

Legend

000030 is greater than 21, but not than 210000!

nonetheless thanked this post

04/13/2020 at 10:19 PM #126002 quote

Vonasi
Moderator

Master

As Roberto points out – it depends on the time frame that you run your strategy on. On a 1 hour based strategy there is only a candle every hour so TIME = 080000 is the same as HOUR = 8 but on a 1 minute time frame there are 59 candles in between where HOUR = 8 but TIME does not equal 080000.

nonetheless thanked this post

04/13/2020 at 10:37 PM #126003 quote

nonetheless
Participant

Master

OK, got it. Hour =8 includes everything in the 8th hour up to the last candle before 9.

Second question: the main reason I changed was not of course to save zeros, but because it made it easier to optimize on the half hour. How would I check a range of times eg 170000 to 230000 by half hour? Steps of 3000 won’t work.

04/13/2020 at 10:46 PM #126004 quote

nonetheless
Participant

Master

What I had been doing is running it twice, first on the hour 170000 to 230000, then on the half hour 173000 to 233000 — both by steps of 10000.

Is there a better way?

04/13/2020 at 11:27 PM #126006 quote

robertogozzi
Moderator

Legend

I use 10000 steps (1 hour), so you can use 3000 (30 minutes), provided your TF ends on a 30-minute boundary, that is it must not have to be greater than 30 minutes.

nonetheless thanked this post

04/14/2020 at 7:17 AM #126020 quote
Vonasi
Moderator

Master
robertogozzi wrote:

I use 10000 steps (1 hour), so you can use 3000 (30 minutes)

But that would give you times such as:

170000

173000

176000 (not a valid time)

179000 (not a valid time)

182000

You will have an awful lot of tests with no results to run through.

Perhaps optimising with two variables would be better and more efficient. MyHour 0 to 23 in steps of 1 and MyMinute 0 to 1 step 1 and then add the following to the start of your strategy:
```
extra = 0
if myminutes = 1 then
extra = 3000
endif

mytime = (myhour * 10000) + extra
```
04/14/2020 at 8:21 AM #126025 quote

Nicolas
Keymaster

Legend

80000 is obviously not the same number as 8! 😉

04/14/2020 at 9:07 AM #126037 quote

nonetheless
Participant

Master

Nicolas wrote:

80000 is obviously not the same number as 8

Yes, my bank manager has been patiently trying to explain that to me.

Nicolas thanked this post

04/14/2020 at 9:10 AM #126038 quote

nonetheless
Participant

Master

Vonasi wrote:

Perhaps optimising with two variables would be better and more efficient. MyHour 0 to 23 in steps of 1 and MyMinute 0 to 1 step 1 and then add the following to the start of your strategy:

Very clever! I’ll try that, thanks.

04/14/2020 at 11:09 AM #126059 quote

GraHal
Participant

Legend

Vonasi code above added as Log 205 here …

Snippet Link Library

Vonasi thanked this post

04/14/2020 at 4:46 PM #126129 quote

MAKSIDE
Participant

Veteran

GraHal wrote:

Vonasi code above added as Log 205 here …

td{border:1px solid #ccc}br{mso-data-placement:same-cell} Snippet Link Library

It’s a treasure ! thx Grahal for the link

GraHal thanked this post
Author

Posts