Author: David Blackman
Date: 04:56:39 12/31/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 31, 1999 at 04:09:27, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On December 31, 1999 at 03:12:36, David Blackman wrote: >>As a couple of other people mentioned, this design "feels bad". It implies that >>each chess engine has exactly one chess board, which might or might not be what >>you intended. By convention, it implies that a chess engine is a special kind of >>chess board with some of the same operations, although C++ doesn't enforce this. > >Actually, this is exactly what I want. An engine should have one chess board. >And isn't an engine just a chess board with functions to search and evaluate it? > >-Tom Ask yourself what public methods you want available for class chess_board and class chess_engine. Including constructors. If nothing horrible turns up that breaks the whole design, then go for it. I don't think this decision can burn the program very badly, and depending on exactly what public methods you want, it might even be correct.
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.