Author: Ed Schröder
Date: 22:19:55 03/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 28, 2001 at 00:56:14, James T. Walker wrote: >On March 27, 2001 at 17:11:48, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On March 27, 2001 at 16:21:09, James T. Walker wrote: >> >>>On March 27, 2001 at 12:11:02, Ed Schröder wrote: >>> >>>>On March 27, 2001 at 11:12:13, James T. Walker wrote: >>>> >>>>>On March 27, 2001 at 10:52:43, Ed Schröder wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On March 27, 2001 at 10:34:29, James T. Walker wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>As a non-programmer I have to say this is one of the silliest threads I have >>>>>>>ever read. It brings up a few questions to programmers. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>1. Why would you let another program decide for you when/how to save a game or >>>>>>>any other info you think is important?? >>>>>>>2. Does being desiginated as "Slave" prohibit you from saving information when >>>>>>>terminating/starting a game?? >>>>>>> >>>>>>>I notice when playing two chessbase programs vs each other in auto232 mode they >>>>>>>both save the game WITHOUT the box being checked. This seems reasonable to me. >>>>>>>Where's the beef? >>>>>>>Jim >>>>>> >>>>>>Being the "slave" you are dependant from the commands send by the "master". >>>>>> >>>>>>This includes the "save game", "new game" and "force move" commands. >>>>>> >>>>>>The option "save opponent game" is there because the "save game" may cause >>>>>>troubles on the remote program. If it does you turn it off. >>>>>> >>>>>>Ed >>>>> >>>>>Hello Ed, >>>>>As you know I'm not a programmer and know nothing about it but what do you mean >>>>>by "dependant"?? Sure you need to be told "lets start a new game/It's your >>>>>move" but seems to me letting your opponent control if you save info or not is >>>>>crazy. How can the "master" stop you from saving info before starting a new >>>>>game? >>>>>Jim >>>> >>>>"Dependant" is the key-word of the auto232 protocol. The slave in principle >>>>has nothing to do and the master is in full control sending commands (mainly >>>>moves) to the slave. That's why the expression master-slave is a good chosen >>>>one. >>>> >>>>Of course you can add your own stuff such as controlling "save game" yourself >>>>for instance when the slave retrieves the "new game" command from the master >>>>you could decide to do a "save game" being the slave. However if the "save >>>>opponent game" box is checked on the remote PC the game is saved twice which >>>>isn't desirable also. >>>> >>>>Ed >>> >>>Hello Ed, >>>Well naturally that's what I was thinking. Also if you decide to save the info >>>at the "new game" command you could also decide to ignore any "save game" >>>commands from the master. I just don't see any sense in putting any more >>>control of your program than necessarey into the hands of the opponent. You >>>should be able to make your program do anything you want. And I see no reason >>>to complain about someone else's program sending or not sending "save game" >>>commands. >>>Jim >> >>When was I complaining? >> >>I was only explaining. >> >>Ed > >Hello Ed, >No, Not YOu. I was just responding to the thread at the end. You just happened >to be the last poster. Vincent was the one starting this thread and he's such a >great programmer I can't understand why he would have a problem with auto232 >causing his program problems. >Best Regards, >Jim I see, thanks. Nevertheless Vincent's complaint is honored and the "save opponent game" box is active as default setting in the upcoming update of Chess Tiger on April 2. Ed
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.