.Account.Mode==Mode.Simulation

[Brillo]

NT7 and NT8 have an enum defined called Mode.
In NT7 the Account object ( exposed in StrategyBase via the Account property ) exposed a mode property of type enum Mode that could be used to assess if an account is a simulation account.... or not.
This property of the Account object is missing in NT8. In NT8 how does one determine if an account is simulation or not?

[NinjaTrader_Brett]

To know if its sim please change to the following logic in NT8. We removed the Account.Mode since it was duplication of the provider system.

Account.Provider == Provider.Simulator

Note there is also a provider for Playback. Provider.Playback.

[jeronymite]

.Account.Mode==Mode.Simulation

Provider.xxx does not seem to have been updated to align with the various providers currently supported by NT. For example, these providers are referenced by what appears to be a somewhat informal provider index, not by name:

• Provider1 [PFG]
• Provider2 [Barchart.com]
• Provider3 [Google]
• Provider4 [Vision Financial Markets]
• Provider5 [FXCM (Rithmic)]
• Provider6 [GFT]
• Provider7 [Kinetick]
• Provider8 [CQG]
• Provider10 [FXCM]
• Provider11 [BigTick]
• Provider12 [Continuum]
• Provider13 [Clear Corretora]
• Provider14 [Rithmic]
• Provider16 [Quam]
• Provider18 [NinjaTrader Continuum]
• Provider19 [Rithmic for NinjaTrader Brokerage]
• Provider21 [NinjaTrader FXCM]

So, for example, querying Account.Provider and trying to determine the actual provider when the provider is Kinetick would result in Provider.Provider7, not Provider.Kinetic which intuitively one would expect.

Can this structure be updated to align with all current providers and return meaningful results accordingly, please?

Thanks.

[NinjaTrader_Brett]

We had to maintain support for our NT7 license system for NT8. As such we had to keep the same approach here with providers as NT7 vs NT8. I do not expect any change here in the near term since changing those has implications outside just code clarit. (Which we are always working towards and made great improvement there with NT8 coding standards)

[jeronymite]

.Account.Mode==Mode.Simulation

Thanks, Brett.

Presumably, the licensing system will be upgraded in time too to eliminate these types of dependencies?

In any case, surely it would be possible to introduce a structure that parallels the Provider enum structure and that provides the real provider identity?

Thanks.

[NinjaTrader_Brett]

No we will maintain the system as is for NinjaTrader 8. As to the idea of adding another structure to 'map' I will add this to the suggestion list.SFT-839

[NinjaTrader_Brett]

As I created the SFT development made me aware that you can get this info as well via connection options. Use Account.Connection.Options.BrandName.

Would actually recommend you do that and it would satisfy your need.