Yes I think you are right LeeD. I guess there could be some advantages for several users in using a platform which provide a good infrastructure. After all, there are several programs which work about like that and are widely used (<b>if the users are profitable is another matter</b>). As personal preference (I imagine it could be the same for anyone who knows how to code) creating the infrastructure is not an effort barely comparable with that of creating profitable strategies. So there is more than plenty of time to refine the platform while working on strategic concepts. This is also the reason why you see such beautifully looking plarforms, which the creators could not make profitable, and had to "shift" the business on program selling instead of making profits from trading.Quote from LeeD:
...
Haha! I like how you call C++ "masochistic". Just last night I spent over an hour finding out that a reference to an object was becoming invalid due to the object being moved to a new location (by copying). This is something that would never happen in C# or Java.
...
Tom, in your post you basically say: A trading strategy has an entry signal and an exit signal. How can a strategy work in a different way?
If one has a profitable platform, he would just trade or readily find investors to trade, and not make a commercial effort to sell the program itself.
About the second part, I think i will leave that to be a little "mystery" ;-) Engaging in that discussion would surely start a big epic war on the conceptual aspects of trading
I don't really have interest most people change their coding languages, nor their approach to trading ;-)
Tom