V July 25 what a mess : New Parameter not shown

• 08/10/2022 at 10:10 AM #198859
  PeterSt

  This one is less obvious and therefore mentioned explicitly as a bug.

  I’m adding a new parameter, “test”, and in the now shown result “set” (because I created a new situation with that new parameter), all is shown except for that parameter.
  This can’t depend on a lacking guide, I’d say.

  Regarding the functionality (which may look good to me), it seems to me that those who created this never tested it ? I mean, new functionality is that added result set, but the reason for it (the new parameter) is not even shown ? hmm.

  

  PeterSt

  Participant

  Topics: 73

  Replies: 2503

  Been thanked: 805 times
  08/10/2022 at 10:26 AM #198864
  PeterSt

  PS: It seems that I accidentally put this in the ProOrder Support board. The intention was Platform Support.
  Apologies.

  

  PeterSt

  Participant

  Topics: 73

  Replies: 2503

  Been thanked: 805 times
  08/10/2022 at 11:11 AM #198866
  GraHal

  PeterSt wrote:

  except for that parameter.

  My work around is to close the Results Table BEFORE you run opti (again) then any new parameter gets included in the ‘new’ Results Table.

  If no new parameter is added to the opti variables Form then there is no need to delete Results Table.

  I am finding (slowly) that maybe (bit too early to say) I prefer the new ‘Multi-Results Table set up’.

  

  GraHal

  Participant

  Topics: 211

  Replies: 8779

  Been thanked: 2183 times
  08/10/2022 at 11:29 AM #198867
  PeterSt

  GraHal wrote:

  My work around is to close the Results Table BEFORE you run opti (again) then any new parameter gets included in the ‘new’ Results Table.

  You are too funny. I know that this helps, but at doing what you propose the other (multi) results have disappeared. So what’s the use(case) ?

   

  GraHal wrote:

  I am finding (slowly) that maybe (bit too early to say) I prefer the new ‘Multi-Results Table set up’.

  Oh, I already agree that the Multi-Results feature is nice for sure ! No, it is great !
  But nothing works so far and I can’t do a thing. Maybe you can judge (and hopefully debunk) my other two posts ?

  

  PeterSt

  Participant

  Topics: 73

  Replies: 2503

  Been thanked: 805 times
  08/11/2022 at 9:14 AM #198938
  GraHal

  PeterSt wrote:

  You are too funny.

  I did say – a work around – to enable use to continue opti while PRT sort it out.

  I doubt PRT can make it such that a new parameter can be introduced to an existing ‘multi-Table’ because the existing TS showing in the multi-Table will not have any values for those new parameters.

  PeterSt wrote:

  the other (multi) results have disappeared. So what’s the use(case) ?

  We then be no worse off than before multi-Table was introduced?

  

  GraHal

  Participant

  Topics: 211

  Replies: 8779

  Been thanked: 2183 times
  08/11/2022 at 10:34 AM #198947
  PeterSt

  I already ran into errors (error messages) because of removing a Parameter. And yes, all logical.

  Because of its usefulness, I already hate it when I add a parameter (um, I do this dozens of times a day) because I will lose the current comparisons (database of current backtests if you will).

  

  PeterSt

  Participant

  Topics: 73

  Replies: 2503

  Been thanked: 805 times
  08/11/2022 at 10:47 AM #198948
  GraHal

  Work around … take a screen shot of the top results of the multi-Table (m-Table) before adding a new parameter and thus needing to delete  the m-Table.

  I know it’s not ideal and it’s all more faff, but least you will have something and not lose everything.

  Maybe PRT can sort it so that …

  If new paramaters Then
  New m-Table = Yes
  Old m-Table = Yes
  Endif

  I know it won’t be written as above in Server / backtest engine speak, but it was quickest way for me to get my idea across! 🙂

  Point being that the old m-Table remains / need not be deleted even when a new m-Table is automatically started.

  Easiest would be if PRT can just show null entries for existing TS in the m-Table when new parameters are added? So no need for a new mTable?

  

  GraHal

  Participant

  Topics: 211

  Replies: 8779

  Been thanked: 2183 times
• Author
  Posts