Re: computer-go: Is the Go Modem Protocol used in actual tournaments ?

[Don Dailey <drd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

My main program is pure ansi C so I should be all set for a port later
to other OS's if I need to.

I have a gui I wrote in C but using a  non-dos library (xforms.)  I am
considering the possibility of writing a  qualtiy GUI in perl, which I
understand is quite compatible with Windows with a little care taken.

Does anyone have any experience with Perl Tk  between platforms?

Don



   Date: Tue, 09 Jan 2001 21:29:29 -0800
   From: David Fotland <fotland@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

   Absolutely you should make your code portable, and just adjust the GUI for
   the operating system.  In that sense your go engine is not written for any
   OS in particular.  I wrote Many Faces originally on RTE for the HP 1000, then
   ported it to Unix, then to DOS, then to Windows-95.  For a long time I 
   maintained
   the Unix GUI and Windows GUI independently, and used the unix environment
   to find the more difficult bugs.  But eventually the Windows development tools
   became much better than those on HP-UX, so I switched to just developing on
   Windows.  But the go engine is straight ANSI C, and has been ported to
   many platforms with out problems.

   I haven't developed on Linux or Solaris, but Windows has a far superior 
   development
   environment than HP-UX.  I've recently used the GCC toolset, and again the 
   Windows
   development environment is far superior (for C and C++ development).

   The DOS port was the worst, but I had to do it sell the product.  Living in 
   450KB
   was very painful :)

   David

   At 12:13 AM 1/10/2001 +0100, you wrote:
   >Don Dailey <drd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
   > > Since I  am not  considering a  commercial program,  I stay with Unix,
   > > which in  my opinion is  superior.   But if I  wanted to  go into this
   > > commercially, it would be truly foolish to ignore Windows.
   >
   >There is also a side benefit: Writing portable code forces you to write
   >cleaner code, and forbids many shortcuts that may later turn out to be more
   >expensive than expected. And testing on multiple platforms is one good way
   >to find some well-hidden bugs. Also, today Windows may be the best platform
   >for a detail-market program, but one day, if something like the Ing prize
   >will be available, one-off performance may be more relevant than mass market
   >appeal. And the day will come when Windows (at least as we know it now) is
   >not the obvious choice for anything.
   >
   >-Heikki
   >
   >--
   >Heikki Levanto     LSD Levanto Software Development   heikki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   >                "In Murphy we Turst"

   David Fotland