Fix relative exits after non-gap limit parent fills#109
Merged
Conversation
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
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be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.
Summary
strategy.exitafter its non-gap LIMIT parent fillsRoot cause
A flat-born relative exit has no concrete stop or target until its parent fills. It was classified as phase 0, scanned before a non-gap LIMIT parent, skipped while flat, and never revisited after its prices materialized.
Scope
The ordering adjustment applies only when:
The child joins the parent existing phase rather than a new global phase, preserving
P1 / C1 / P2 / C2source ordering.Validation
git diff --check: cleanThe regression matrix distinguishes accepted base, rejected broad scheduling, and the final fenced behavior. On the private Quant replay, strict matches improve
95 -> 123of 135 and entry, exit, and PnL P90 become zero. Count parity remains unresolved (246 engine / 135 TV-window), so this PR does not claim a tier promotion.