Netting MT5, how to catch the closing moment by stop loss.

vvebus:

Yes, I did not mention multidirectional orders, but they are there.. But not the point.

Can you hint how to solve my question on this event (check whether the position was closed, the reason is not important)? 

Will it all come down to ENUM_DEAL_ENTRY?

Start by carefully reading the documentation. There is such a thing

The type of the trade transaction is passed in the type parameter of the MqlTradeTransaction structure.
Possible types of trading transactions are described by the following enumeration:

ENUM_TRADE_TRANSACTION_TYPE

After reading the table of these types, you can experiment in the debugger, which will speed up understanding.

If you are only interested in opening or closing positions, you can only stop at studying the TRADE_TRANSACTION_DEAL_ADD type

I start analyzing the closing of a position by saying that there is a transaction, its type is TRADE_TRANSACTION_DEAL_ADD, but it is no longer possible to select a position.

if(trans.type == TRADE_TRANSACTION_DEAL_ADD)
  {
   if(!PositionSelectByTicket(trans.position))/ / & & PositionGetInteger(POSITION_MAGIC) = = magick) & & check the symbol and whatever your heart desires
    {
     // Here it is already necessary to go into history and
      if(HistoryDealSelect(trans.deal))
       {
       long hdr = HistoryDealGetInteger(trans.deal, DEAL_REASON);
       if(hdr = = DEAL_REASON_SL)
;/ / here are actions provided that the position is closed by SL
}
    }
}


BUT! this is for working on a hadge account and there is no check for ENUM_DEAL_ENTRY entering the market or exiting the market, in my case
, this is not necessary in this particular expert Advisor. This is already your own decision, whether it is necessary or not.

Andrey Barinov:

It doesn’t matter if they are unidirectional or multidirectional.

If logically they are executed on the same tick, as described in the first post, then the order of execution is not guaranteed.
This means that the delay can work earlier than the stop and this will lead to undesirable consequences. 

Your apology is accepted.

How does it not matter? If unidirectional, then the position size will increase, otherwise it will decrease down to zero and even to a change in
direction.

Only here I have never checked how the stop loss will be worked out on netting, if the stop is set when the position size was, the path is 0.1 a in
when the stop was triggered, the position size became 0.2, 0.5 or even larger. The entire position will be closed, or only the initial size, that lot size
which was at the time of setting the stop loss?

Here, to prevent such incomprehensible cases on netting accounts, I would prefer to put orders of the opposite
direction instead of stops.

I wasn’t going to apologize.

Andrey Barinov:

Did you read the first post of the branch?

Well. I read it a little inattentively the first time. How many times have you read it inattentively? Where does it say about multidirectional orders?

In fact, the answer was given immediately the most correct. All this is caught when processing the OnTradeTransaction() event, where in the case of closing
the position of the foot and activation of a pending order will be divided, even if such events occurred at the same time.

And the fact that vvebus did not understand the possibilities at all
OnTradeTransaction() are obvious.

Andrey Barinov:

 If I were You, I would change the logic of the program a little. The way it is now, on a real account is fraught with problems.

The situation. There is a sell position and it has a stop loss. At the same stop loss level, you want to open in buy with the same lot (set to pending
order). In reality, it may happen that the delay will work BEFORE the stop and the position will collapse. And there won’t be a new one. If the postponement
a larger volume than the current position, then the result will be an INOUT transaction and a new position of small volume, and even without stops.

In the tester, this is not enough to play, but on a live account it can be easy.

And if the strategy does not provide for opening pending orders at all? Why give advice, as well as go to someone else’s monastery with your
own Charter?