Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 13:03:49 10/06/99
Go up one level in this thread
On October 06, 1999 at 15:51:29, Frank Schneider wrote: >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 No, it's too ambitious for a commercial project. Everyone wants to keep you locked in. Dave
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.