Since Winboard lets you connect to any server a long as you specify an address and a port (And whether you want to use timeseal or not) it should be easy to implement.
Although, maybe some people would like to use the same interface to play the game, and then to analyse it post-mortem....
Convekta people probably have fairly good knowledge of what would be necessary, interfacing FICS is very similar to interfacing ICC (both servers use the same kind of telnet-based interface, many commands are the same, others differ in syntax but share the same concept, the syntax for positions is the same). In case ICC support is implemented and one would like to support FICS too, this should be a matter of a few weeks at worst.
> Although, maybe some people would like to use the same interface to play the game, and then to analyse it post-mortem....
I use iNemesis and I'm very happy with it, but the reason you state is the reason I think FICS implementation would be useful.
> In case ICC support is implemented and one would like to support FICS too, this should be a matter of a few weeks at worst.
I think it would just take a couple hours, though I could be mistaken.
You are. While the differences are minor, and you may keep the same working model of the applications, a lot of details are different. Just a few examples:
- different timeseal
- game/seek/player notification have slightly different format
- commands like sought, games, history etc have slightly different output
- while both servers have command bracketing (opportunity to identify server replies to match them with the commands issued, a must for serious interface), those are different and the way they work is too
The common denominator (style12, command line) is large enough that simplistic interface like xboard may work on both servers, but if you want to give some polish (in particular, issue some commands for the user transparently, show him some lists and graphs etc) you must start handling differences.
Powered by mwForum 2.27.4 © 1999-2012 Markus Wichitill