Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:11:31 11/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
On November 07, 2001 at 10:07:37, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: > >Well, xboard was not design for internet either. It came later with the zippy >code. That is actually incorrect. Xboard was _originally_ designed as a human interface to play on a chess server. Support for gnuchess was added much later by Tim Mann. And then the protocol developed beyond that point. But its original function was to connect a human to a chess server to play chess with other people that were connected... > >>clock in human vs engine games, or in engine vs engine games, but accept the >>clock updates when on a server. It was never envisioned as an interface that >>would be used to operate a program in a tournament with a human operator and >>a _real_ chess clock as well. >> >>It can be used like that, but not very conveniently. What is needed is a quick >>"adjust clock" option so that the clock can easily be synchronized with the game >>clock (manually) when needed. > >That would be cool. Maybe and engine message to the interface saying >that "2 minutes has to be taken out of the clock" or "set remaining >time to 15 minutes" or something like that. Then, the engine can ask >the user and act. That will keep the spirit of the engine taking >control of the interface. > I think you can already do this. You can use some keystroke that says "I want to type a command that goes directly to the engine" to tell the engine anything you want. There are warnings about entering moves like this, of course, as things get out of sync. >>>>short, it turns into a kludge one way or another. When I play in tournaments, >>>>I use "text mode" always. And have absolutely no problems of any kind doing >>>>so either... >>> >>>Of course, the discussion is whether we can do this in WB or not. >>> >> >>Right. And it means debugging two sets of code, one that ignores winboard's >>clock values, one that trusts them explicitly, and hoping that one doesn't >>screw up the other... And it is almost a certainty that the server code will >>be tested the most, since that is the most common way of using it. Leaving >>potential bugs/holes in the "tournament mode". > >For what I read, most people have already a "operator time" feature for these >tournaments. What I proposed does not add any code to debug except a >substraction line. I do not think it is a big deal. Operator time is trivial to implement. But what if you have to suddenly run to the rest room, and lost 10 minutes on the clock while you are gone. And you had only set up for 10 minutes of operator time? > >Let's not digress here. Vincent said that you cannot handle all this with >winboard and that statement is not correct. My point is also that programmers >should be aware that if they use winboard, there are ways to do it better >without restarting the engine. > >Regards, >Miguel > > >> >> >> >>>Regards, >>>Miguel
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.