hello, when I complie an EA I get warnings like;
Function "CloseTheseTrades" is not referenced and will be removed from exp-file

is there a way to fix? or does it matter? Do I just have to define them? if so what is the code?

Thank you

It means that the compiler notices that pieces of code are not being used.
The warnings you see are just optimisation messages; the compiler will not include these functions in the created executable.

The original programmer may have had several reasons for writing these (now non-used) functions in the first place, but technically speaking, your expert will work without them.

__________________
Better being out, wishing to be in than being in and wishing to be out.....

Ok, thanks. is it because the main secction of code was voided but the bottom line wasn't voided with it?
This is more of the code that references
void CloseLoosingTrades() { // included by Renato
for (int i=0; i<OrdersTotal(); i++) {
if (OrderSelect(i, SELECT_BY_POS, MODE_TRADES)) {
if ( (OrderSymbol()==Symbol()) && (OrderMagicNumber()==MagicfromSymbol()) && (OrderComment()==GetCommentForOrder()) ) {
if (OrderType()==OP_BUY)
if ( iFXAnalyser(240,MODE_DIV,0)<-DVLimit*Point )
OrderClose(OrderTicket(),OrderLots(),Bid,GetSlippage(),clCloseBuy);
if (OrderType()==OP_SELL)
if ( iFXAnalyser(240,MODE_DIV,0)>DVLimit*Point )
OrderClose(OrderTicket(),OrderLots(),Ask,GetSlippa ge(),clCloseSell);

double GetSlippage() { return((Ask-Bid)/Point); }

No, void here means that the function is not supposed to return anything to it's caller.
Don't worry, the function "CloseLoosingTrades" is just never being used anywhere in the main code, that's all.

__________________
Better being out, wishing to be in than being in and wishing to be out.....

Ok, thanks for the info. Could I be safe then in removing the code? I just like having the 0 Errors and 0 warrnings show

To save you from having to put it back if you remove too much:
Just surround the code by multi-line comment /* ... */ like the example below.

__________________
Better being out, wishing to be in than being in and wishing to be out.....

Can you ever be safe if you remove "close losing orders" from the code???
You can! If your aim is to blow up the account

__________________
MQL4 programming is easy ^^

Shinigami, stop scaring the man. (He is wise enough to demo first, I am sure..)
There might be dozens of unused functions which have nothing to with the code this expert is using. It could even contain much worse code that we are unaware of.
You and I do not know the functionality of this expert, so we cannot tell if this function is realy needed.

If you do not agree, would you be so kind to tell him where to put the call to this routine, without having seen any of this experts code....?

Cheers

__________________
Better being out, wishing to be in than being in and wishing to be out.....

Ok, I'll just leave it the way it is

That piece of code is not used for some reason. If it is not used, it can be:
removed
commented out

In either case things won't change.
But I'm saying that if there is some function that is not used, take a look at the logic of the EA. Maybe its actually a bug?

__________________
MQL4 programming is easy ^^