Support Board
Support Board
Search Board
Control Panel
View My Posts / Threads
Direct MessagesDate/Time: Fri, 26 Apr 2024 13:59:42 +0000
[Programming Help] - Sierra programming - Tagged recalculation question
View Count: 446
| [2021-06-06 10:05:26] |
| User92573 - Posts: 483 |
|
Dear Support I realise this question has arisen many times over the years and I have posted some questions myself in the past, however, given the importance surrounding this functionality within Sierra I'd be grateful for your comments. Note: I've thoroughly read through "30.3 - Charts Reloading Often" and the sections that follow. My ACSIL programming for Sierra follows the guidelines and the examples provided. Example (I've simplified timeframes to make this clearer) [Message Log] Chart #38 has tagged chart #39 for full recalculation. Chartbook: CHARTLNK_A.Cht | 2021-06-06 09:48:51.174 Chart #38 has tagged chart #40 for full recalculation. Chartbook: CHARTLNK_A.Cht | 2021-06-06 09:48:51.174 GBPAUD[M] 3 Min #40 | Performing a full recalculation because it has been tagged. Chartbook: CHARTLNK_A.Cht | 2021-06-06 09:48:51.183 GBPAUD[M] 12 Min #39 | Performing a full recalculation because it has been tagged. Chartbook: CHARTLNK_A.Cht | 2021-06-06 09:48:52.269 Chart #38 = 60 min (chart #38 is for want of a better description is the source data for #39 & #40) Chart #39 = 12 min Chart # 40 = 3 min Chart #39 references #38 Chart #40 references #38 *Clearly this is just a section of the many charts which all follow this reference order - with all looking to a Higher timeframe and a prior numbered chart. No circular references exist. Questions: 1) #38 already loads first as a result of chart order. So, Why is, or does, chart #38 (the higher timeframe) need to tag #39/#40 for recalculation when it is #40 that is referenced by #39/#40? 2) The (autoloop) study runs on every new bar so: Chart #39 (12min) references #38 (60min) and Chart #40 (3min) references #38 (60min) ... all on a Bar x Bar basis. So once loaded, why is recalculation necessary when one would expect it is already achieved on the arrival of each new smaller timeframe (higher frequency) bar? ** #40 also references #39 but is again the lower timeframe and and higher #chart number. 3) How can we as a user group improve this and/or remove what seems like an unnecessary action? It would be a major relief for many users needing to reference other data and charts if a full solution/response could be provided. Maybe it could even be addressed and presented in the sticky/Sierra programming notes. This is such a huge part of Sierra Charts appeal over other platforms. I really hope it can fully answered and possibly revisited for a thorough review as soon as possible. As always, I'm happy to contribute to the cost for time allocated to this extremely important functionality within Sierra so please direct message me with your thoughts and the cost associated with this work. |
To post a message in this thread, you need to log in with your Sierra Chart account: