OK, so you're referring to functionality in general, instead of the functionality of RTX.
With respect to forcing the open to be equal to the close, I'm not sure I see the advantage. If the 1st trade within a 5-min period is above the last trade within the previous 5-min period, it would make sense to reflect that and not make up an open price that match the previous close, or a prev close price that matched the open. At times the true open may be completely outside of the range of the previous bar (and this would obviously be more exaggerated on the first bar of the session). Seem like you would just prefer removing the opening mark on bars and just show the closing mark (I'm more of a candlestick guy myself).
Anyway, seems like we are getting a little off topic here as I thought you were referring to the advantages of the sierra developer platform vs that of IRT (RTX), but I'm certainly open to hearing about any functionality you'd like to see in IRT.
Not sure how long your experience is in sierra charts...
However if I understand your thread here right - you are testing out a demo of another software since 7 days...
and you conclude that there are (big) differences.
I used RT very much longer (years) to even understand what RT/Investor is capable of.
Just look at the vast number of videos on their website - they take already weeks to watch and eventually reproduce
input for your own instruments.
So my 2 cents are: instead of arguing in early stage - dig deeper into the stuff provided already.
I've got an RTX Project I'm working on called Volume Candles that will be available soon in 12.4 beta. It's an RTX Indicator that essentially combines the drawing of a candle, volume at text, and a volume profile, for whatever periodicity your chart is set to.
Please register on futures.io to view futures trading content such as post attachment(s), image(s), and screenshot(s).
All 3 components are optional (can do candles with profile. Text with profile, etc).
But I'm showing you that to inform you that RTX is more than capable of being programmed to plot the type of bars you described. I think we just may be talking about 2 different things. If you're saying that our library of available RTX indicators is not as vast as other programs who have provided similar extension functionality for much longer than we have...then sure, that's a fact. But as far as what you can do with respect to developing indicators in RTX, I think you'll find that there are not many limitations. And if you do find limitations (as I have over past 6 months), we'll do the work necessary to remove those limitations (as we've done over past 6 months).
Last edited by LS Chad; September 14th, 2015 at 03:10 PM.
The following user says Thank You to LS Chad for this post:
The good news is, I believe we intend to release the source code (.cpp) for Volume Candles, which we haven't done for others like TINT and PVP. That alone will give users/developers a great deal of insight into how to build such indicators. It will also provide the ability to take that source and modify/tweak to your liking and make it your own.
Let me expand on something I said in last post...while our library of RTX indicators is still relatively small (but quickly growing), our built-in indicator library is extremely robust and mature. I'm differentiating a built-in indicators as one included with the software, built by Linn Software, and built without the RTX library. Versus RTX indicators which are built using RTX library and tools. Now given, most RTX indicators to date have also been developed by Linn Software, but we're hopeful that will not always be the case. There is certainly a great deal of opportunity for a talented 3rd party developer to take advantage of.