Pascal Georges wrote:
Hi!
>> crosschecking with another engine... However, the
>> engine eval values in the graphical display might be
>> very usefull to identify a blunder one made. To graph
>> it, well one needs the values first. One could then
>> probably check in more easily on the real points. And
>> to get an estimate value I can run the engines at a
>> very short time limit and then explore deeper at the
>> crucial points.
>
> Please have a look at the code of the Score graph window :
This part does not apply here. All I suggested is to add a
way of annotation that just places the bare number to every
move, resulting in the score graph to be calculated at each
point.
> it is tricky and it deterred me for example to add a
> second graph for output of an extra engine.
I see. Thats sad, but well, surely you know that part much
better than I do. (Still I'd like to note that I did not
suggest any code there ;)
> I think one could use drop down lists instead of the pretty
> space intensive radio buttons, like for the one used for
> the opeing book selection. It could look like this:
[...]
> What do you think?
[...]
> That looks ok for me.
Ok.
> By the way I find some dialog boxes in Scid a bit
> ugly ...
What do you have in mind here and what is your definition of
"ugly"? Just in case some of those few I did need
improvement.
> Meanwhile it could be interesting to make things look a bit
> better (this also may require the use of Tk 8.5).
Visual design is not unnecessary, but I think really a
second order problem. Besides the simple fact that Tcl/Tk
will also in 8.5 look plain ugly of people who like the
design of say KDE, IMHO. I admit that I do not really find
Motif ugly, I'd call it "functional", something one could
live with.
>>> - To have a "full" score graph, adding the engines evaluation
>>> even if the best line is played (by the engines thinking)
>>> would be helpful. One probably might want to add
>>> engine-lines only in case of "not best line played".
>> I thought those options already exist !?
> You can set "annotate all moves", right, but you'll then get
> the engines line as well, not just the value.
> Yes, ok. But score with line should go together, I think. Not be separated.
Ah! Now we come closer to my point ;) I generally agree with
you here, except for the case where I added a bunch of my
own analysis already and I'd like to cross check that
analysis for:
- Did I really notice the turning points?
- Did I overlook a critical point, been to careless?
Ie. cross check whether my already made annotations comply
to the evaluation of the engine. For this I find the values
for the current position handy, whereas the full line might
not be of to much interest here. Besides the actual
evaluation change, I think that also the slope is of
interst. Did it change in one move rapidly, which would
indicate a blunder, or was it more a steady improvment of
the position without clear errors, and where does the engine
thnink this has started.
>>> That's right, but in some cases the user may
>>> want to annotate the game up to the last move,
>>> and let it analyze the last position. So this
>>> would mean yet another option ...
>>>
>> I admit, that I thought about a checkbox for "stop
>> after last move" as you say both behaviours may be
>> wished for.
>>
> This option is useful indeed, simply the layout should be
> carefully thought about, to avoid an overcrowded dialog
> box.
I see that point and I perfectly agree that it is very
difficult to find a suitable GUI. IMHO the best GUIs allow
for everything without making things too complex. However,
complex problems sometimes require complex solutions.
> Probably using a radio?
>
> Annotate seveal games
> [*] Filter [ ] from current to [spinbox]
>
>
> Yes, of course, but the dialog box is 2 lines bigger ... Notebooks (one
> tab with "extra options" or "batch annotation") ?
I see this point, my difficulty with a notebook interface
for the dialogue at hand is, how to split it in a sensible
way. "Extra options" is most likely a bad thing everywhere,
as you've hardly an idea what that might be. Its a bit like
a collector for "everything that did not fit anywhere".
A naming like "batch annotations" would be more to my liking
definitely guiding the users in the first place to what he
might find there. For the case at hand it would just
contain, hm, two lines which I do not think is "good enough"
to justify a whole notebook page.
A notebook (IMHO) compares to sectioning dialoges like a
"part" in a book. The notebook is "the book", a tab is
something at the level of a "part", while sections are like
the chapters. And a part should most likely contain several
chapters or at least a certain amount of the story.
>> Is it really common to NAG _every_ move once the position
>> changed at some point and the advantage just stays? I never
>> saw this.
>
> When looking at a line you get +/-, and you don't have to look at
> previous lines to see what was the latest current NAG.
> Three letters are not a big waste of space.
I've no problem with the 3 letters at all. I'd just place
the NAGs to the point where something happens and not from
there to the next point where something happens. Just to get
the "turning point" clearer and not cluttering symbols
around. But I understand now your way of reasoning.
>> Hm. If the engine processes evaluation along one line it
>> uses full performance on that single line, 100% CPU time
>> invested into this single line. If it has to calculate three
>> lines, it has 1/3, netting a 15s evaluation to 5s.
>
> It does not work like that.
Ok.
>>> Of course, this is the correct behavior. The engine setup
>>> is there to be used.
>>>
>> Sure. I tell it "calculate 3 lines by default". Perfectly
>> sensible, the engine starts up with 3 lines. Then I reset it
>> to 1 line in the analysis window. Surely cause I had some
>> reason to do so. This should IMHO be respected.
>>
> It is. But if you stop / start the engine it is normal to get default
> user settings back.
Hm, following this logic I think the spinbox should be
removed from the dialogue. I do not follow it, so just
please leave it there, its quite handy sometimes. Maybe I
understand the spinbox the wrong way.
--
Kind regards, / War is Peace.
| Freedom is Slavery.
Alexander Wagner | Ignorance is Strength.
|
| Theory : G. Orwell, "1984"
/ In practice: USA, since 2001
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This SF.Net email is sponsored by the Moblin Your Move Developer's challenge
Build the coolest Linux based applications with Moblin SDK & win great prizes
Grand prize is a trip for two to an Open Source event anywhere in the world
http://moblin-contest.org/redirect.php?banner_id=100&url=/
_______________________________________________
Scid-users mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/scid-users
