ChessGUI 0.245f is available

[JuLieN]

[moderation]
A branch starting with an unnecessary insult and its subsequent answers was pruned.

[Matthias Gemuh]

Graham, Graham... mediation requires a conflict - which I fail to find here.

There is a lot of people deserving some kind of special color in the chat - unfortunately the chat it is limited to 1 extra category excluding the admin (myself). For Season 2, this category was called "Season 2 Participant" in order to inform people in the chat that the green chatters were in fact authors of a participating engine. Hence, all other people who were not a programmer of the participating engines were removed from this list.

For Season 3 I have decided to call this group "VIP" in order to add more people to it. Matthias can be added if he still wants to, of course.

I have nothing more to add to this.

A participating engine (that plays only some games in Stage 1 only) qualifies for "Season 2 Participant" in all stages, but a participating GUI (that actually plays each game in all stages) doesn't qualify for "Season 2 Participant" ?
Then how did I even get a green colour in Stage 1 of Season 2 ?

[Martin Thoresen]

A participating engine (that plays only some games in Stage 1 only) qualifies for "Season 2 Participant" in all stages, but a participating GUI (that actually plays each game in all stages) doesn't qualify for "Season 2 Participant" ?
Then how did I even get a green colour in Stage 1 of Season 2 ?

For Season 3 I have decided to call this group "VIP" in order to add more people to it. Matthias can be added if he still wants to, of course.

[Tom Likens]

ChessGUI 0.245f is available

... now supports Sysygy.


Matthias.

Hello Matthias,

I'm curious what toolkit did you use to write ChessGUI? The reason I ask is because I'm wondering if you'll ever produce a Linux version. I know the odds are against it, but depending on the toolkit it may be possible (e.g. Qt or wxWidgets would both be easy to port).

regards,
--tom

[Vinvin]

...
Well, for whom it is of any interest, there exists a simple pairing algorithm that works for any number of players (and can even be applied in real OTB tourneys without the aid of any computer):

Put all (N) Chess boards on a long table, ... .

Thanks for the algo ! I shall surely stare more closely at it when improving the pairing algos in ChessGUI.

More here if you want : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Round-robi ... _algorithm

[Matthias Gemuh]

Thanks for the algo ! I shall surely stare more closely at it when improving the pairing algos in ChessGUI.

More here if you want : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Round-robi ... _algorithm

Thanks !

[Matthias Gemuh]

Hello Matthias,

I'm curious what toolkit did you use to write ChessGUI? The reason I ask is because I'm wondering if you'll ever produce a Linux version. I know the odds are against it, but depending on the toolkit it may be possible (e.g. Qt or wxWidgets would both be easy to port).

regards,
--tom

Hi Tom,
the 100%-unportable thing was coded using ancient Borland C++ Builder 5, which has its own VCL (Visual Component Library).
A very strong programmer once tried to port the thing to Linux but failed, and since then things have become much worse.
Best,
Matthias.

[Tom Likens]

Hello Matthias,

I'm curious what toolkit did you use to write ChessGUI? The reason I ask is because I'm wondering if you'll ever produce a Linux version. I know the odds are against it, but depending on the toolkit it may be possible (e.g. Qt or wxWidgets would both be easy to port).

regards,
--tom

Hi Tom,
the 100%-unportable thing was coded using ancient Borland C++ Builder 5, which has its own VCL (Visual Component Library).
A very strong programmer once tried to port the thing to Linux but failed, and since then things have become much worse.
Best,
Matthias.

Hey Matthias,

Well, I certainly wasn't volunteering and I was definitely signing you up for the work, (generously
though, I *was* going to double what you've been getting paid so far to work on it!)

Ah well...

sad regards from Linux-land,
--tom

[mcostalba]

There is a clear standard for how scores should be reported, however (centiPawn), both in WB protocol and UCI. If engines report scores that should be multiplied by a fixed factor to be meaningfully compared with other engine scores, these engines are non-compliant, and should be fixed.

You have the obnoxious attitude to talk about thinks you ignore, throwing in your idea and erroneously think this must be the reality.

Of course you have also the arrogance to never reconsider what you have said previously after people explains to you, but I already know very well these 2 fellows (hand-waving and presumption) go always hand in hand.


P.S: Your argumentation about scores as probability of winning are completely off and confirm you don't know how engines are tuned/developed.

[hgm]

Well, if I see the quote and your reaction to it side by side, I cannot help noticing how much more sense my statement makes than yours. If anything is wrong with the quoted statement at all, I hope that someone can explain what exactly that is, rather than just ranting about how much he dislikes it / me.

In fact it is very hard for me to distill any sense from what you say whatsoever, other than that you consider something to be obnoxious. Which seems to be your general attitute towards life, so no big surprise there...