Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Reference Indicators #59

Closed
codeplea opened this issue Mar 30, 2019 · 2 comments
Closed

Reference Indicators #59

codeplea opened this issue Mar 30, 2019 · 2 comments

Comments

@codeplea
Copy link
Member

I'm thinking of adding a new feature: reference indicators.

These would be alternative implementations for select indicators which calculate the function in the simplest way possible. No consideration would be given to speed.

For example, the Chandelier Exit indicator (#58) would be calculated by calling ti_atr(), ti_max(), ti_min(), and then doing some very simple math (maybe with ti_add(), or other utility functions). It would be slow as heck (it makes 4+ passes through the input), but we could look at it and know that's it's correct. It also shouldn't be pretty easy/fast to implement.

The idea is to make these indicators so simple that they can't be wrong.

Then we would add another testing program. This program would call ti_ce() and compare it's outputs to ti_ce_ref() for a bunch of random data and parameters. The same program can also test against streaming indicators, once they are implemented (#57).

@rdbuf
Copy link

rdbuf commented Mar 30, 2019

Awesome idea!

We will get rid of a number of headaches this way. No need to rely on third-party implementations to check against anymore (which can too be wrong or absent at all).

@codeplea
Copy link
Member Author

The basic groundwork is merged in.

It would be nice to see benchmark expanded now to compare old indicators vs reference indicators vs streaming indicators. benchmark could probably use a good refactoring too. Perhaps it and smoke should share some of the test and compare code.

@codeplea codeplea mentioned this issue May 27, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants