| |
BGonline.org Forums
Trad to Nactation conversion algorithm
Posted By: Nack Ballard In Response To: Trad to Nactation conversion algorithm (Matt Ryder)
Date: Thursday, 10 February 2011, at 6:31 p.m.
> means enter both/all checkers.
Isn't this indistinguishable from U?
Yes. In fact, you could get away with using any character or no character at all, as the move is forced. The advantage of ^, > and < is that it is easy to spot in a sequence where fanning, partial entering and entering occurred, to whatever degree that information might be useful. It also makes it easier to track down where a Nactation error might have occurred elsewhere in the sequence, as humans are very unlikely to mistakenly use those characters if there are no checkers on the bar.
[Tim said] "Nactation (in its currently published form) isn't developed enough yet to handle such cases [seldom occurring positions with over a thousand legal candidates]."
The key phrase in Tim's statement that makes it correct is "in its currently published form."
I'm not sure I'll bother to address such extreme rarities even in the update, but resorting to a few colors as we've discussed before (not the only solution, but may be simplest) makes it easy to cover all legal plays. The job is already split up to some extent over many of the 37 letters (including the 12 underlined families). Say you count just half of these and count an average of 13 for lower-case/italic/(underline)/bold; that's already a divisor of 240. Moreover, it may help to ask yourself what you are trying to accomplish; by design, the better plays typically rise to the top of the hierarchy anyway.
Nack
| |
BGonline.org Forums is maintained by Stick with WebBBS 5.12.