RE: [GT] New EMA and backup SEMA

[kw <gt AT netsrak.net>]

Did you forget to attach the

. SEMA?


cheers,

K
On Fri, 2008-02-29 at 10:00 -0600, Weigert, Thomas wrote:
> I should give a word of caution regarding the reimplemented EMA.
> 
> While I tested it and compared it with TA_lib regarding output, and
> found it to work, both when used inside of indicators and when used from
> the command line, I found one situation where it does not work as it
> should:
> 
> When I use it inside of the SMI I recently wrote (a rather complex use
> of nested indicators) I find that for some reason I don't understand the
> SMA that starts of the EMA is not recorded properly, and so the EMA
> fails. I cannot see what causes that but am exploring. (If I change the
> computation of the starting point to just use the current value rather
> than the n-day SMA, then there are no problems.) Note that while having
> many other problems, the original EMA did not have this difficulty. 
> 
> I imagine it has to do with the nesting of indicators and dependencies
> and the I:Generic:ByName, that somewhere some update gets lost. I will
> explore further and hopefully uncover another important insight re GT
> which I am obviously still missing....
> 
> I am attaching SEMA.pm, which is the EMA starting with the actual value
> of the data series.
> 
> Th.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Robert A. Schmied [mailto:ras
AT
acm.org]
> > Sent: Friday, February 29, 2008 1:38 AM
> > To: devel
AT
geniustrader.org
> > Subject: Re: [GT] New EMA
> > 
> > 
> > But currently
> > > that is what is happening.... I could try to make the EMA work like
> SMA
> > > as one need not do the check on the interval (it just uses the
> > > dependencies to compute the SMA for the starting value.
> > >
>