Hi Mike,
There is currently some "parsing" of "user checker actions on the gtk-board" to
yield "actual backgammon moves." For example, my continuous checker slide from
6 to 3 was parsed as 6/5*/3 rather than 6/4/3. Even though a user can readily
undo and redo a move, we should strive to have a parsing scheme that is as
intuitive as possible. Perhaps I am atypical, but parsing my action as 6/5*3 is
counter-intuitive. Philippe's suggestion that a continuous slide like mine
never be parsed as pick and pass makes sense to me. Ideally, parsing of actions
should not simply default to "pick the first legal interpretation" of the
action based on some arbitrarily ordered list of legal interpretations.
Of course this is a small issue, but it seems like the kind of issue that
should be discussed before any "official" release.
Louis
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Petch" <[email protected]>
To: "Louis P Zulli" <[email protected]>
Cc: [email protected], "Jonathan Kinsey" <[email protected]>, "Philippe
Michel" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, April 9, 2009 3:30:30 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] Handling ambiguous checker moves
On 09/04/09 1:13 PM, "Zulli, Louis P" < [email protected] > wrote:
Yes, but the user has to know how his action will be interpreted, and that
interpretation should make sense intuitively. If I slide a checker directly
from 6 to 3, I don't expect that to be interpreted as 6/5*/3. Of course I can
undo the move and replay it in a "clearer" way. But I think Philippe's reply
makes sense; there is simply a small problem in how gnubg is currently
interpreting certain actions. Fix that, and no extra prefs or complications are
needed.
I am aware of that. However moving a piece from 6 down to 3 has two possible
paths as you point out. One hits and one doesn’t. I as a user really wouldn’t
have the expectation that the program would know what I intended (either way),
nor do I believe it should tell me about the other path. I personally would
have no issue if GnuBG picked the first valid move that it could find that got
from one to the other. And I would not be surprised if that is exactly what is
happening. If you change how the program finds valid moves, then the result of
which choice the program plays in this situation may also change.
My opinion still stands - It is up to the user to correct the ambiguity. If the
bot makes the play you don’t like then you simply go back and correct it or
move the pieces the way you want to begin with. I actually use the program and
select every move and where it will go (With all intermediate steps) simply so
that I always get the result I intended without the bot ever making a choice
for me.
_______________________________________________
Bug-gnubg mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
