Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 15:16:55 08/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 25, 2002 at 12:48:01, Russell Reagan wrote: >On August 25, 2002 at 09:31:39, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>a) before protocol 3 is implemented someone else than Tim Mann >> must take over winboard development (Dann Corbitt?) >>b) problems will not go away of course unless protocol 3 is not >> downwards compatible. > >Why does that make problems if it is backward compatible? If there is a new >protocol (and the majority is new) and the old commands are simply still >supported, then why is that a bad thing? If you encourage people to use the new >features, and then they still use the old ones, they don't have much to be >complaining about. > >Russell Because some lazy persons (in principle most winboard engine authors are lazy, otherwise they would have their own interface) are that lazy that they don't want the winboard protocol to get fixed, because they must rewrite their thing, as they want to keep up with protocol version 3. you need an entire new protocol. of course you can use a lot of the same commands, but all kind of race bugs must get out.
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.