Hi Pascal, Aha! Now you _are_ interested :-)
I am willing to take this on, provided that we agree on some sort of specification first. The points you raise are valid, but you should be aware that the number of corrections to make in one 'go' does not practically influence the duration of this 'calculation mode' at all. Most time is spent during the investigation phase (that is, while preparing the list of suggested (etc) corrections). It is indeed a bit worrying that only an hour glass tells you that "we are working on it." The duration of the correction phase depends on the number of corrections only (which is easily understood by the user as he has given them 'a go' himself) and is as far as I have noticed reasonably mild. Besides, it shows a progress bar. The time taken for the investigation (only!) depends on the number of player names in the dBase and the size of the ssp file. Reason: The investigation is not stopped at 'MaxCorrections'. It continues after that without side effects with the only goal to present the total number corrections to make "of which the first MaxCorrections are listed below." So it is either a) a configurable quicker scan, without knowing what is at stake beyond, or b) a full scan, taking some time The in-between solution with some (fixed) number of corrections as we currently have it is the worst of both worlds. The investigation takes the same time, but you have to do it multiple (and sometimes even many) times. My patch follows approach (b). There is something to say for (a) as well. [Q] Do you a (all) agree that having a configurable limitation implies approach (b) for "infinite" and (a) for the other options? That is, in the latter case the user is NOT informed on the status/progress of the spell checking for the current base-as-a-whole. [Q] Do you have any suggestions to enhance the hour glass experience during the investigation phase? A bar on the progress of the scan through the dBase name list seems the most logical for approach (b), although it will not necessarily reflect the time spent/to-go on actually suggested corrections. For approach (a) I see no other means than to create a correction counter bar, relative to the number of MaxCorrections to find. [Q] So we add another configuration item somewhere in "Options" or is there room for a "Config" button somewhere in the maintenance dialog? I do not like the idea of having an intermediate dialog each time (before the investation is started). In this config dialog I would suggest to add a checkbox for inclusion of the ambiguous corrections as well. Currently this is enabled by default at program startup and it can only be disabled once at least one full scan is run (as it is an option in the correction editor). So if you do not want them included in the list, you have to rescan anyway. [Q] What do you think of a producing a game list filter to produce a list of games with inconsistent game date vs. player life times? I did not dig into the dirt deeply enough yet to guesstimate whether this would be doable. Certainly would love such feature myself. [Q] Dunno if you got the chance to notice this, but the Chess Assistant guys follow the approach to explicitly add a player's country (FIDE style) to the name in a pair of ()'s. In the game list this country part is stripped off. What do you think of this? It avoids quite some name conflicts, but certainly not all. And... the scid spell checker explicitly and deliberately strips them off the existing database names, not even using them for conflict resolution. [Q] The CA guys have added a 'FIDE-id' field to the player database. Looks nice for cross referencing with the improving FIDE member lists (and we could add such id to the ssp as well), but to my experience there are too many (interesting) games played by players who do not even have a FIDE id. Comments? Would it imply a change to the existing dBase format, then forget about it, imho. -- Room for more -- All in all we should realize that even the existing scid spell checker is heaven on earth if you compare it to what the commercial guys have put in the market! Cheers, Joost. On Thu, 2009-02-19 at 10:24 +0100, Pascal Georges wrote: > This part of Scid needs more corrections than that. For example : > - triggering a players'name correction makes Scid enter in calculation > mode without any user feedback (and this lasts a couple of minutes) > - the limit of corrections should be user defined (a drop down list > with "1000", "10000", "100000", "infinite" values), which I think > should solve all issues. > > I did not make any complete test but certainly more changes are > needed. If someone wants to take this, I would be happy to merge the > changes once it is effectively completed. > > Pascal ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Open Source Business Conference (OSBC), March 24-25, 2009, San Francisco, CA -OSBC tackles the biggest issue in open source: Open Sourcing the Enterprise -Strategies to boost innovation and cut costs with open source participation -Receive a $600 discount off the registration fee with the source code: SFAD http://p.sf.net/sfu/XcvMzF8H _______________________________________________ Scid-users mailing list Scid-users@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scid-users
