Re: [Bug-gnubg] Suggestion: Annotation move/cube error

[Jim Segrave]

On Mon 04 Aug 2003 (12:10 +0200), Mueller, Achim wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> just an idea: people are sometimes complaining, that you don't see the
> kind of error you made (in the annotation window), only ?, ?!, ??. What
> about adding a small "m" (move) and "c" to the comments?
> 
> I looked into the source and found the "skill" declaration in play.c,
> but without differing between move and cube. Would it be much work to
> implement the idea above?

In theory, no. For every move, there is a move record which, if it has
been analysed will have a cube and chequer play skilltype (an integer
indicating anything from very good (someday this may work) to very
bad. Changing the displayed output is easy, once we have a consensus
on what the desired format is. I believe the ?!,?,?? is taken from
chess notation. One problem is keeping the width to a minimum while
coping with the worst possible move to be listed:

11: 24/23* 22/21* 20/19* 18/17*?!?!

That's the most pathological one I can think of - 4 moves from/to 2
digit points, each being a hit and a doubbtful (or very bad) cube and
chequer play rating.


-- 
Jim Segrave           address@hidden