Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 16:20:30 06/09/04
Go up one level in this thread
On June 09, 2004 at 18:56:59, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >On June 09, 2004 at 18:00:10, Sune Fischer wrote: >>> Admittedly parsing SAN is not hard (Zappa has a SAN parser) >>>but Long algebraic (Nf3xe5) is easier for humans and computers both. >> >>Long SAN is never used in books or in human notations afaik, so it's not >>something people is used to, hence it's not as good as SAN for humans, I think. >> >>But it is a good compromise if you want some readability while avoiding the SAN >>hassle. >> >>-S. >>>anthony > >I think long san should be very easy for anyone used to san to pick up. It's >only the addition of 2 characters. Where there is a will there is a way, of course. The question is only if there is a will. Problem is, that this notation is not used (AFAIK) by anyone except a few non-commercial engines. I don't think we, as programmers, have the right to say to people "look you're just going to have to get used to reading it like this, because it's way easier for me to program this way". _We_ are the ones who have to conform, _not_ the general public. They just won't show any sympathy for your/our very technical and logical arguments :) >Note that the long san move contains all of the information of an e2-e4 style >move. Yes I get that and make no mistake about it, I use it myself internally for a few debug prints here and there, I'm flexible/lazy myself that way :) -S. >anthony
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.