Author: Frank Schneider
Date: 12:51:29 10/06/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 05, 1999 at 14:46:56, Dann Corbit wrote: >On October 05, 1999 at 13:42:44, Frank Schneider wrote: >[snip] >>>Why not use ACE to abstract the whole thing, and then it will run on anything >>>under the sun from Linux to MVS to NT? >>yes! I had a similar about 20 months ago and asked some people what they >>thought about it. The feedback I got was not very encouraging, but I >>like the idea more than ever now that there are freely available and stable >>CORBA-implementations. >> >>See >>http://home.t-online.de/home/hobblefrank/cidleng.htm >>for the 'white-paper' I wrote. >That's a lot more ambitious than what I had in mind. What I had in mind is that >ACE would be used as a communication channel only (just a transparent transport >vendor of sorts). > >What you have in mind would be a great idea for an automated tournament manager Yes. >(I think). CORBA seems like an enormous amount of machinery for just passing >messages. Thats right. Adding an ORB to a chessprogram just to pass moves to XBoard would be overkill. But it would make sense in an environment that provides an ORB or something similar that the engine can use (Linux+KDE+Mico, DSOM, DCOM, Jini). > But if need the objects to actively do something (like managing a >chess tournament...) CORBA would probably be ideal. My idea was not only about engines, but also about other modules (database, openingbook, endgametablebases, GUI) of chessprograms. It would be very nice if different modules of different programs could flexibly be linked together using any middleware/protocol. Maybe too ambitious for an amateur-project. Frank
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.