[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-gnubg] Analyse / Rollout - do we need it?

From: address@hidden,net
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Analyse / Rollout - do we need it?
Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2011 18:31:10 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; U; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; nl; rv: Gecko/20110616 Thunderbird/3.1.11

Op 14-10-11 15:24, Michael Petch schreef:
On 14/10/2011 4:07 AM, Ian Shaw wrote:
There really is little point to it at the moment.

However, I would ask why this rollout can't be saved. It is that it can't be 
fitted into the sgf structure, which is designed for matches? I was rolling out 
a few reference positions yesterday, and the only way to do it was to set up a 
prior position and roll, move to the desired position and roll out the single 
play. (It was DMP, so there was no place to analyse static position as a cube 
action - and even this would roll out both double and no double).

Aha, yes obvious that Analyse/Rollout makes sense when you are rolling
out a reference position! I didn't even consider that, most of the time
I'm rolling out Cube decisions and actual moves.  With that being said,
I'd also go onto say that not being able to do "Analyse/Rollout" at DMP
is actually a bug.  I tried it and I see you get the error about not
being able to cube. I tried a 0.15 release and this was allowed, thus my
view its likely a bug. As for why it can't be saved or extended, I can't
say - I'd have to review how that code was handled, but I don't see why
it couldn't be represented in SGF. Someone else may have an idea.

The existing .sgf file writing code knows how to write an .sgf file from a game/match kept as a linked list of structs in gnubg. When you set up a position like this, the structures aren't set up and the .sgf code won't work. It would not be that hard to create functions to write an .sgf file from a single position, but it's not been done.

A few secondary issues, if you are tweaking the menus:

1) Note that there is inconsistent spelling of "analyse/analyse". (The "s" is 
more prevalent, and I have a slight preference for it.)
Agreed. I am more partial to S over Z myself.
I think the original gnubg code before I did any work, had analyze. I may well have been the one who started putting in analyse, but never made any effort to update exisiting ones. In theory, it should be in the .po files to distinguish UK and US English (US would use analyze, UK analyse)

2) Why is "Cmark" called "Cmark" and not simply "Mark"?  What information does the 
"C" convey?
I was curious about this naming convention as well. It has confused some
people in the past. They thought CMARK was to mark cubes. Simply going
with "Mark" makes sense to me.

3) Analyze/Rollout/Game and ) Analyze/Rollout/Match don't roll out the whole game game or 
match, they only roll out the Cmarked moves, I believe. Would the menu option be clearer 
if it read "Rollout Marked"?
Agreed. As it is it adds confusion. You might want to have an option for
Rollout Marked for the current game and still have Rollout Marked for an
entire match. But definitely "Marked" should be part of the menu item
for clarity.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]