Author: Steven J. Edwards
Date: 00:06:27 06/10/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 09, 1998 at 19:51:03, Robert Hyatt wrote: >if we are going to nitpick the standard, here is one thing that is >really ugly: when you output a variation with black to move, it >apparently should be done like this: 15... Nf6 Nf3 d5 etc. That >"15..." is totally illogical. for normal moves we see 15. e4 h6 16. >Nf6 and so forth.. so that the move number is one "token", then it >must be followed by a white move, and a black move. Using "15..." >violates that and is more difficult to parse to boot, since most >scanf() input readers will suck in 15... as one string... > >why not use the more common 15. ... Nf6 format, where a separate >token (...) indicates that the white move is omitted. This seems more >common in published analysis and it is much more compatible with normal >parsing algorithms... I have strong agreement with this as it does make things more consistent. Also, there is a precedent in ANSI C with the same ... elipsis token (for variable count formal parameter list declarations). The print literature is divided on this. (As it is on most things.) Personally, I would like to not have any period immediately following the fullmove number, but the voting back in 1992 was well in favor of making move numbers look like decimals. -- Steven (sje@mv.mv.com)
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.