Roger Brown wrote:It seems to work here. All I enter is an * though and press filter and it strips out all the games except ones with the matching position on the board. When you say string it suggests that you type something else. Could you give an example?
Well, "*1/2-1/2", for instance, would cause you to select only games containing the position that are draws (provided the result is one of the tags you display in the header lines). Just "1/2-1/2" woul give you all draws,regardless of any position.
I have one question though. Let us say that I am watching some games and a position of interest develops in front of me.
How do I stop the playback of the game to query the database?
Auto-play can be paused by using the P button in the button bar above the board in the current position, and resumed by pressing it again.
Putting it in analysis mode at that moment works but mouse control and timing is a bit tricky.
Not sure what exactly you are doing, and what makes it tricky.
I uploaded a version now (same link) that does scroll games on load to the position they were selected on, and suppresses auto-play in that case.
I also implemented some simple filtering options on numeric tags, in the Load Options dialog:
*) You can set a lower limit on the year
*) You can set a lower limit on the Elo that one of the players has to satisfy
*) You can set a lower limit on the Elo that both players have to satisfy.
So by setting the single-player limit to 2500, and the two-player limit to 2400, you can select games where at least one player has 2500+, and its opponent has at least 2400+. This filtering is only effective when you also filter on position. (But you can always filter on the opening position.)
These limits are now implemented as persistent options (/eloThreshold1, /eloThreshold1 and /dateThreashold). I am not sure if that is desirable; perhaps I better make them volatile, with default 0 (meaning they are not applied).
I have NOT tested the filtering, as I did only have PGN of comp-comp games, not containing rating tags.
Thanks. I am sorry I don't have an equivalent XBoard yet; I am currently traveling, and I have not been able to figure out how I can connect my Linux to the WiFi here (while in Windows this was easy).
I am still thinking on how to implement the interface for material compostion. Perhaps I should supply a tickable option to seach for positions with the same material as the position currently on the board. This would be a bit cumbersome when there is a lot of material, but I suspect you would mainly want to use this to search for end-games. Perhaps a useful mode could also be: exact match for the Pawns, but other pieces anywhere. Perhaps a combo-box in the Game List window, where you can set the comparison mode: exact, subset, material + exact Pawns, material-only, off. I don't want to put too much stuff in the game-list window, whereeven people not wanting to use the database features would see it all the time, but there now is a completely useless set of buttons there now, which you can clickto do things that you could also have done by clicking the list directly.
hgm wrote:Thanks. I am sorry I don't have an equivalent XBoard yet; I am currently traveling, and I have not been able to figure out how I can connect my Linux to the WiFi here (while in Windows this was easy).
I am still thinking on how to implement the interface for material compostion. Perhaps I should supply a tickable option to seach for positions with the same material as the position currently on the board. This would be a bit cumbersome when there is a lot of material, but I suspect you would mainly want to use this to search for end-games. Perhaps a useful mode could also be: exact match for the Pawns, but other pieces anywhere. Perhaps a combo-box in the Game List window, where you can set the comparison mode: exact, subset, material + exact Pawns, material-only, off. I don't want to put too much stuff in the game-list window, whereeven people not wanting to use the database features would see it all the time, but there now is a completely useless set of buttons there now, which you can clickto do things that you could also have done by clicking the list directly.
Hello H.G.,
I cannot keep up with your improvements/additions!
I would like to agree with your suggestion of including a "fuzzy" option rather than insisting on an exact matches. As you said, in an endgame situation - or advanced middle-game - what may be of interest is what happened when R+B+Knight went up against R+B+three pawns so the subset idea is an excellent one.
Thanks for all the unpaid labour you put into Winboard/Xboard.
I have uploaded yet another one. This time with a complete user interface. So the kludge with the asterisk in the Filter field is no longer needed, and no longer works.
At the bottom of the Game List there now is a new button "Find Position", which both applies the text filter, and filters for the current board position. The "Filter" button only applies the text filter.
The 'recognition mode' can be set from the Load Game options dialog, (where the Elo Thresholds could also be set), through radio buttons, to any of the 4 modes we discussed. (And these modes should all work now!) To easily get to this dialog, there now is a button 'Thresholds' at the bottom of the Game List as well.
Let me know if anyone sorely misses the old buttons I now removed to make place for the new ones (Load, Next and Previous), or if the controls should be made different from what they are now.
Adam Hair wrote:I have been splitting my time between Arena and WB lately. Arena could be equated to the Windows OS, while WB is like Linux (or at least how I perceive Linux).
I suppose you are referring to use of command-line options for features that cannot be controlled through menu dialogs. The paradoxical thing is that XBoard now actually has less of that than WinBoard, now that it has become easy to add new dialog controls to XBoard (just adding them to a list like they were UCI options). While it is still an extreme pain to change existing dialogs in WinBoard, where you have to specify sizes and positions of each element in screen coordinates, and add lots of code to read them out).
What in your opinion are the most important aspects of WinBoard that are "Linux-like"?
I'm sorry if it sounded like I knew anything about Linux. I meant that, for a know-nothing such as myself, the general impression about Windows and Linux is that the people who know what they are doing prefer Linux and the rest of us use Windows. It is somewhat the same with Arena and Winboard in that WB is more challenging to use. But not too much so, and the work you have done with WB has been great.
Adam Hair wrote:I have been splitting my time between Arena and WB lately. Arena could be equated to the Windows OS, while WB is like Linux (or at least how I perceive Linux).
I suppose you are referring to use of command-line options for features that cannot be controlled through menu dialogs. The paradoxical thing is that XBoard now actually has less of that than WinBoard, now that it has become easy to add new dialog controls to XBoard (just adding them to a list like they were UCI options). While it is still an extreme pain to change existing dialogs in WinBoard, where you have to specify sizes and positions of each element in screen coordinates, and add lots of code to read them out).
What in your opinion are the most important aspects of WinBoard that are "Linux-like"?
I'm sorry if it sounded like I knew anything about Linux. I meant that, for a know-nothing such as myself, the general impression about Windows and Linux is that the people who know what they are doing prefer Linux and the rest of us use Windows. It is somewhat the same with Arena and Winboard in that WB is more challenging to use. But not too much so, and the work you have done with WB has been great.
I fine WB easy to use. Maybe because that was the first i used.
I use WB and Arena. Also fine Arena easy to use as i started
using it shortly after WB. I do use other ones but prefer WB and Arena. Yes a big thanks to hgm and others who worked on it and a
big thanks to the Arena team.
Didn't it work the way I described it?