Closed NichUK closed 3 years ago
nice thanks for sharing. Looks promising. gimme some time to review.
Happy to contribute. As I said, there are definitely a couple of things that I rushed. The MarketSummaryMessage currently contains two copies of all the data which is obviously pointless. There's a comment in there with a couple of ideas. Interested to hear your thoughts when you have some time.
I screwed up the FundamentalMessage with the protocol update. I didn't realise that they'd removed the reserved fields as well as adding new ones, and apparently didn't test that properly. I have a new commit that fixes it correctly.
I screwed up the FundamentalMessage with the protocol update. I didn't realise that they'd removed the reserved fields as well as adding new ones, and apparently didn't test that properly. I have a new commit that fixes it correctly.
did you run all the integration tests?
dont worry, we gonna merge it at some point, Im just busy on other stuff..
Sorry, I've been busy too. I did run integration tests, but of course, I updated the Fundamental Message test to what I thought was the new 6.1 protocol wire format... but I was wrong. :) I will have another look at everything very shortly.
OK - I've been through and sorted the problem with FundamentalMessages and MarketSummaryMessages. It should be good to go now.
we need to rebase this one.
@NichUK could you please rebase this PR?
Sorry, I haven’t been around for a bit. Happy to look at this again.
Sorry, I haven’t been around for a bit. Happy to look at this again.
Hey @NichUK, it would be nice. I've received some comments that this PR is not following existing design patterns but I think this is due to the fact the previously we're supporting different types before going all-in for doubles.
My recommendation would be to start with a rebase and Ill begin a review to see what changes are needed before merging it.
I know you put some effort into it so Ill prefer to prioritize your work because newer protocol support is getting bigger.
THanks, Mathieu
OK, so this is a no go. Between the removal of the generics, and the fact that we both implemented Dynamic Fields, but differently, rebasing this is just not going to happen. So I've taken an up to date version, and I'm manually cherry-picking the protocol changes on to it. It's not too hard, so shouldn't take too long, and it'll be way cleaner. I'm just doing 6.1 at this stage, and then we can overlay 6.2 on top. Annoyingly, the current IQFeed beta, has a bug in it regarding OptionChains (the response is always in 6.2 dialect, which is different from previous, no matter what protocol you set - I've reported it), so I'll either have to downgrade for a bit, or suffer the annoyance of tests that fail. Shouldn't be long for a fix though, it's a simple issue for them to solve. Give me a day or two, and I'll open a new PR for it.
@NichUK makes sense. thank you!
Protocol 6.1 PR as requested. I'm sorry, it's a bit of a monster, but feel free to ask about anything that's not obvious, or point out some terrible coding. :)
I think it hits all the points from IQ's upgrade 6.0 to 6.1 release notes, but I haven't audited that.
Nich