Winboard menu organization

[Alessandro Scotti]

Hi,
I would like to redesign Winboard's menu structure, to make it closer to standard Windows applications (e.g. clipboard and edit operations moved to Edit menu, window layout moved to Windows menu, and so on... with also more freedom for future modifications), and I'm wondering what impact could such a change have on the current users...

If you use Winboard GUI regularly, please answer the poll above. Thanks!

[Vladimir Xern]

I always thought that Winboard's menus needed to be completely redone. For example, every time I open the "General options" dialog box, a little part of me wants to scream.

I know that Winboard was designed to be functional, but I don't think it's necessary to sacrifice functionality by modernizing it, so to speak. That's why I'm excited about this Winboard X project: making Winboard everything it should be. At least, that's my 2 cents.

[Alessandro Scotti]

Hi all,
thanks for partecipating in the poll!
It seems better not to change the menu structure then... would be quite a bit of work just to disappoint half of the user base

[Anonymous]

Hello Alessandro,

My opinion is to leave Winboard menu structure as before !


My wishes for the next release of Winboard:
-Running automatically gauntlet,swiss tournaments(without any tourney manager)
-to be compatible to UCI protocol
-Own Auto232 adapter
-All engines to use main opening book


BTW,i downloaded your modified Winboard:A BIG THANKS TO YOU !

All the best to you in 2006,
Best Regards,
Sedat Canbaz

[Vladimir Xern]

Perhaps there are small parts under the whole umbrella of the Winboard "menu" structure that everyone can agree needs to be redone? For example, the extremely cumbersome and inefficient way to set up and edit positions?

I realize that most people here are more interested in the chess engine aspect of Winboard and concentrating on making that better, but I'm pretty sure there must be some people who are more interested in the actual chess aspect of Winboard.

[Uri Blass]

What I want to see is only more options for the user.

options that I like to see are:

1)analyze next best move for engines that support it
2)analyze more than one moves for engines that support it.
3)being able to play handicapped match when one program get more time than the other program.
4)being able to play match when every program search for fix time or for fixed number of nodes if the programs support it.

Uri

[Guenther Simon]

well 3) is already supported since very long
(You never looked up the thread about 'Tinkering with WB' it seems?)
4) (for depth) is probably supported too by all WB engines who fully support
the WB protocol by just adding the depth command.

Guenther

[Uri Blass]

for 3 you are right but it can be improved.

The problem is that I do not see how to set nunn match between movei and rybka when rybka gets 1 minute per 40 moves against movei's 5 minutes per 40 moves

1/5 in the time control only give white 1 minutes and black 5 minutes

I also do not see how I can tell that time control for a batch file.

For fixed depth match it can be better if it will be able to do it for the main manu when the depth may be also different for different programs.

It also seems to me that winboard only support conventional time control and I cannot uncheck the conventional time control and use fishcer time control(even in fair match).

Uri

[Guenther Simon]

super easy... /tc=1/5 /mps=40

But it will follow the colour and not the player currently.

Hi Greg,
I have updated the readme now (and converted it to HTML). You are right that time controls should follow the player, that's what I would like to implement too but I haven't yet found a good way to attach the info to a player... Confused

It seems Alessandro forgot about that change or it was too complicated
or he had other priorities meanwhile.

Guenther

[Alessandro Scotti]

It also seems to me that winboard only support conventional time control and I cannot uncheck the conventional time control and use fishcer time control(even in fair match).

Hi Uri,
actually Winboard supports both but I must have broken something when I modified the dialog. Fix to come asap!

[Guenther Simon]

Hi Uri,
actually Winboard supports both but I must have broken something when I modified the dialog. Fix to come asap!

It is not broken in the newest version I use, but I have no idea
what older version of WBx Uri uses?

Best regards,
Guenther

[Guenther Simon]

Hi Alessandro,

A possible reason might be that Uri downloaded the August 2005 version
of WBx from the famous 'Tinkering' thread, which gives still the
direct download link below

http://www.ascotti.org/programming/chess/zip/winboard_x.zip

I think you should replace it with the link to your new special WBx page
by editing your old post.

http://www.ascotti.org/programming/chess/winboard_x.htm

Ciao,
Guenther

P.S. may be the last messages in this thread also belong more
to the 'Tinkering... ' thread

[Alessandro Scotti]

Ok,
there's a version here:

http://www.ascotti.org/programming/chess/winboard_x.htm

which fixes the bugs reported by Vladimir (move history) and Uri (time control dialog).

Edit (for Guenther): maybe Uri has a too-recent version!
I had started to rework all dialogs (a heck of a work btw) but released the last version in order to fix an important bug found by Leo, so a few dialogs are still untested. There are still a couple of minor issues that I can see right now, hopefully not big problems... will be fixed in the following days!

[Uri Blass]

my winboard_x.exe was modified in 31.12 so I see no reason to download additional file but it has the bug that I reported of inability to change time control to fischer time control.

Uri

[Alessandro Scotti]

What I want to see is only more options for the user.

1)analyze next best move for engines that support it
2)analyze more than one moves for engines that support it.
3)being able to play handicapped match when one program get more time than the other program.
4)being able to play match when every program search for fix time or for fixed number of nodes if the programs support it.

Hi Uri,
yes I would like to have these features as well, number 3 being the most interesting for me (I agree the current implementation is far from good).
At present, however, I think what Winboard needs most is good engine management. Having to manually edit the ini file, no support for UCI engines, lack of engine information (logo, author, etc.) and no central location for modifying such important settings as EGTB location and hash size are not acceptable anymore IMO. Except for bug fixes and possibly small features, this is my next goal for Winboard.