Author: Adam Oellermann
Date: 01:36:17 07/21/01
Go up one level in this thread
>What does it do that Winboard does not do? >You have described why you made it. >You have described how you made it. > >What are the missing features that you have implemented? Well, there are a few things. For instance I can code in better control over which match requests I accept etc; eg. "refuse to play a particular opponent more that 5 times in a row". I can also write code to automatically dial up and connect if I lose my connection with the ISP. I can write code to play Winboard tournaments a la autoplayer via a TCP/IP connection without having to be connected to FICS. If I want to, I can write code to interface non-Winboard engines. The point is not so much the feature set that I have implemented, but the idea of being able to implement any random feature as it strikes me. While WinBoard provides an excellent base feature set, certainly better than what my program will include, the idea of having a toolset to deal with WB engines and chess servers programatically interests me. I hope this clarifies my position. I am by no means complaining that WinBoard is inadequate; on the contrary, it is an outstanding example of great free software which I use every day. However, the idea of a programmable interface is not addressed by WinBoard. Thanks Adam
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.