What I meant to say is that it's ok to NOT support the protocol and you would NEVER lose a game you should have won AS LONG AS your program makes sure to eat all the opponents dead groups before passing.
Am I correct in this understanding? - Don On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 12:59 -0500, Don Dailey wrote: > On Mon, 2007-01-08 at 17:43 +0000, Nick Wedd wrote: > > >I like the protocol, because you don't have to implement it, > > >but if you don't you should clean up opponents dead stones before > > >passing. > > > > I like it too. But bots which fail to support it will continue to > > lose > > games as a consequence. > > But it's ok to NOT support it as long as your program cleans up after > itself, right? That's how I understand it. > > If this is the case, it's win/win. I would support this on CGOS as > long > as no program was required to understand the protocol. > > - Don > > > > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
