Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 18:06:22 11/29/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 29, 1999 at 20:10:52, leonid wrote: >On November 29, 1999 at 19:17:04, Dann Corbit wrote: >>On November 29, 1999 at 18:55:52, leonid wrote: >>>Hi! >>> >>>What will the position of Windows in three or four years from now? >>Nobody knows. Prognosticators are not very good at it. I once went to a >>meeting where Microsoft officials said that "OS/2 is the wave of the future -- >>all your design efforts should be bent in that direction." > >Your remembering of OS/2 is more that right. This is mainly thinking about the >OS/2 dismay that I am so hesitant about choice of system. Do we still have OS/2 >in this World? Sure, as long as that world is colored blue. >Start writing the complet game, that could take few years, and finish it for >system that is already not there is not big fun. But to be sincere, I dream that >Linux will become robust and omnipresent for all of us. Because operating systems are transient vapors [anybody here using a 15 year old version of an operating system?], why not keep the core of your engine ANSI C or C++? Then, any OS specific parts like GUI or system services can be kept in separate translation units and use a specified interface. In that way, any rewrite you have to do will be fairly trivial. For instance, consider Crafty. There is basically very little OS specific code in the crafty engine. Those bits that must be contained there are surrounded by #ifdefs. The engine is a separate system, which is also written in a fairly portable manner (as evidenced by the simple switch from x-windows to Win32). So by following techniques like those demonstrated by Tim Mann and Robery Hyatt, you can write a chess program and/or OS specific parts in a way that remains portable and flexible. [snip]
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.