[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[GT] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: EMA incorrect when using --nb-item
- To: devel
AT
geniustrader.org
- Subject: [GT] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: EMA incorrect when using --nb-item
- From: Nick Fantes Huege <nfhuege
AT
gmail.com>
- Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2010 20:57:20 +0300
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:in-reply-to :references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=8E3DPLZQgJjLGHUKrYI4e6WOq28J+OZvV8/jgt0gVFg=; b=GbXxrK6bXsKs5zVjHI+lktoiE3aQjlMlvymHe7Cp3UwVJguH4jGIPOMNxnqIn3YUS3 f6rwytUspRkQBjGFxXn758hs9q1pFcmRaa9QTItoHG24UxLm54NVnlcSWoSqtQRX3vVc 8gGNsa7xfy8n9aciQd+4CRuPXIu9dxM6nXza8=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=vPC+2dvFBYD0pAtYXChU7bkvLwGG93vdVMZJrJYXXfQ8SAeypKwVSfulEQwt/uSiI2 f9Jyk/tku+02DpKV9rt7Ldg0K6XjkTX4tPukuvUxvNWkopGHrXsmmMwqsUXwkHL/EsPr HUpoRn6sPG0shWF+DoFyB5lsqIaVx/OL276SU=
- In-reply-to: <4C497B31.4060700
AT
mst.edu>
- Message-id: <AANLkTim8+pnc-SHKSmDeNyipe8k=j4-4oN1bHqSScgOR@mail.gmail.com> (sfid-20100723_195833_723087_90C12A40)
- Reply-to: devel
AT
geniustrader.org
Thomas,
You're right! EMA is calculated exactly as you describe. I have no
problem with that, because it seems to be the right way to do it. The
user should to be aware of the fact that --start, --end and --nb-item
limit the range of the calculations.
I didn't receive your modified EMA (EMA2.pm?). Did you attach it?
Best regards,
Nick