Conversation
Step 0 work
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
3 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What is the purpose of this PR?
I updated the updateRisk function to avoid including previously counted trades by clearing the pendingTrades vector.
What changes did you make? Why?
Cleared the pending trades vector after updating risk.
What bugs did you find while testing?
Trades added to pending trades were being added to total risk every time risk is updated. Risk should only be counted once.
What was the bug you found?
Trades added to pending trades were still considered "pending" even after updating risk, so future updates to risk would still count all the previously pending trades.
How did you address it?
Cleared pending trades vector after updating risk.
What did you struggle with?
Getting started and not putting it off. Also setting up my CMake since it had some issues, but I resolved those.
Is there anything you would change about this step?
N/A