Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 12:03:59 09/19/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 14, 1998 at 12:44:16, Amir Ban wrote: >On September 14, 1998 at 09:05:33, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>IE it seems that the timing is right to do a *complete* protocol. Design it >>right from the ground up. And if the protocol is separated from the engine by >>using an interface program (as we do with winboard/xboard) then, for a temporary >>compatibility fix, a special auto232 to new-interface-spec program could be >>written to filter/adjust messages as needed... with the long-term goal of >>phasing this kludge out.. >> > >What for ? > >You are thinking about this the wrong way. Nobody abandons an old established >standard for such superficial reasons. I don't think the reasons are superficial. Particularly where it's possible to provide a bridge back to the existing protocol, it is quite reasonable to undertake such an endeavor. It's when people don't re-engineer something in a clean matter, but hack at it for years and years going through contortions to add small new features and making it uglier and uglier in the process that I get pissed off, because eventually I will have to add something, so I'll get to the code, and it's a big piece of shit. Automatically communicating chess moves to another program is a simple enough task that, given some sample code, should take a few hours to plug in and test. So when it takes someone weeks to add it in, because of strange timing issues or whatever, there is a problem. For instance, it took Bob a heckuva lot longer than a day to get Auto-232 working, and he says that it still doesn't work when there are tablebase accesses. Bob is no dummy; the problem lies elsewhere. I think it's much better to go to the root of the problem, and come up with a good solution, so that extensions and other modifications are easy later. When you find that you are beginning to strain the existing architecture, that's the time to look for a way to do it better, and provide backward compatibility for things that, for whatever reason, aren't going to be updated. Dave Gomboc
This page took 0.01 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.