-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 54
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
fixed eWrapper for openOrder and orderStatus #13
base: master
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
Please describe (or better yet, show an example) of what behavior is broken, and then provide the rationale for your proposed changes. It's difficult to evaluate your patch without any context. Also, please open an issue before submitting a pull request, so I (and/or others) can provide input before you spend time making changes to code. |
Well, basically there is already
Thus requesting from IB and feeding it back to This change makes sure that if Similarly, when So, changes make sure that in these cases of Open_Order and Order_Status, correctly formated results by eventhandler (which is already implemented in the package) is used. This is inline with every other correctly implemented code in
|
Your last commit changes 91 files with 1,731 additions and 1,375 deletions. I will not merge that. Please undo all the whitespace, newline, and file mode changes. Then use |
Hi, I know you will not merge it. I didn't take into account that the changes will trigger this pull request. Thus, I do not see much point of it. But I have updated it anyway. |
That I haven't merged it yet doesn't mean I don't intend to ("'no' is temporary; 'yes' is forever"). I do not use this package for my job, nor do I use it personally, so evaluating and merging pull requests for it is difficult and not at the top of my priority list. Also, it is good Git practice to create pull requests using a branch in your fork. If you create a pull request on your version of master, and I do not accept it verbatim (e.g. I make changes/rebase before merging), then you may have a conflict when you try to sync your fork. |
Duly noted |
Hi. yes, it has been a long time and I have switched into python wrapper. So, it will take me sometime to test this out. But from a quick look, I think the problem is not completely solved. Looking at:
But line 87 in
In both cases |
eWrapper
was not fully implemented foropenOrder
andorderStatus
.