A nice 2d Board will be more that useful...

On Thu, 26 Sep 2019 at 22:03, Jon Kinsey <[email protected]> wrote:

> The OpenGL 3d board is theoretically portable to WebGL. In practice this
> is likely to be difficult... I’ll take a look, but I have little free time
> so will be a while before I report back on my initial findings.
>
> Jon
>
> On 25 Sep 2019, at 16:44, Guido Flohr <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> 
>
> On 24 Sep 2019, at 23:07, Philippe Michel <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> The current GUI is probably inadequate for a phone or a tablet, but it
> would be nice if gnubg would be usable this way (even with some
> limitations) on chromebooks or on platforms where building it is
> getting complicated (like Macs...)
>
>
> At the risk of being off-topic I would like to share some experiences I
> have made with a somewhat similar project for chess:
> https://github.com/gflohr/lisco
>
> Lisco is a chess UI completely written in JavaScript. The UI is using
> Electron (like Microsoft Visual Studio Code) and is therefore truly
> cross-platform. With truly I mean that it not only works everywhere but
> also looks nice everywhere, for example on my Mac but you can also run it
> in a web browser. At its current state, lisco is only a proof-of-concept
> but you can already play a game of chess against the open-source engine
> Lozza. If you look in the source code, you see how you can change the
> settings to play against other engines embedded into lisco like Stockfish
> or Tomitank or even let them play against each other.
>
> Doing this for chess is trivial compared to backgammon. You mostly have to
> wire together chess engines transpiled into JavaScript with your view via
> protocol adapters. On the engine side you have the Universal Chess
> Interface UCI and the Xboard protocol aka CECP. Both protocols are pretty
> bogus imho but they are universally supported and implementations (protocol
> adapters) exist for a wide range of programming languages including
> Javascript. In other words, you don’t have to write the ugly telnet stuff
> yourself.
>
> On the UI side, almost all chess analysis programs just use UCI, CECP or
> both and this is a well-established technique. Lisco is just one example
> for this.
>
> Back to backgammon: I know that it would be very hard to cleanly separate
> the UI and the engine part of GNU backgammon. Most of the code was written
> at a time, when MVC or MVVM patterns were still unknown.
>
> But it should be feasible to add preprocessor directives and change the
> build so the so that you can conditionally compile and build a headless
> version of the engine. I know, there is already a telnet interface to
> gnubg. Only from my experience with another project
> https://github.com/gflohr/BaldLies I remember that the telnet interface
> is not exactly nice to use. It probably needs some polishing and
> formalization in order to turn it into a protocol that is easy to use.
>
> I would even go as far as saying that throwing the gnubg UI away
> altogether is also a viable option. Yes, it is nice and there is a lot of
> work in it. On the other hand it suffers from bit rot and it is an obstacle
> to porting gnubg to other platforms, where the UI may not even be needed.
> To boot, it only works on the desktop and will probably never work on
> mobile devices (unless somebody does a major rewrite).
>
> Look at chess where you have the choice between hundreds if not thousands
> of different engines that you can use to analyze your play or let different
> engines compete. I am sure a lot of people would happily trade the 3D board
> for such options, especially when it is easy for UI developers to code a
> new user interface. And what about a11y, by the way?
>
> Remember the now discontinued iOS version of gnubg? It was a great success
> although it replaced the UI completely and lacked a lot of features
> compared to the desktop version. But it had made gnubg available to
> zillions of iOS users. The author seemed to be unable to maintain the
> project so that now there are tons of other apps that look fancy but play
> lousy backgammon. And that situation could really be improved, also for
> Android, as the strength of the gnubg project is imho on the AI side, not
> on the UI side.
>
> Cheers,
> Guido
> —
> Cantanea EOOD - We are hiring!
> http://www.cantanea.com/careers/ • facebook.com/cantaneacom •
> twitter.com/cantaneacom
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-gnubg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
>
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-gnubg mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
>
_______________________________________________
Bug-gnubg mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg

Reply via email to