Ratings & Comments

Using the fairychess-test include file, I updated Chess, Grand Chess, Gross Chess, and Chinese Chess to assign constants to the actual function and subroutine names instead of to aliases. They still make use of aliases for these names, but it is now only for display purposes. I am going to postpone copying the changes to the official fairychess include file to give Greg some time to update Opulent Chess without breaking it in the meantime. I haven't changed the documentation yet, but here is what you can do.

1. Include fairychess-test instead of fairychess.
2. Assign the constants to the actual function or subroutine names instead of the aliases.
3. Add the Pawn alias for White_Pawn and Black_Pawn. (The main benefit of the change is that you can now do this.)
4. Replace the if-elseif-else block for checking the legality of moves in each Post-Move section with the following code:

set codename const alias $moved;
if sub #codename $origin $dest and issub #codename:
elseif fn #codename $origin $dest and isfunc #codename and not issub #codename:
else:
set name alias #codename;
set errmsg list "You may not move your" #name "from" $origin "to" join $dest ".<BR>";
set desc join #codename "-Desc";
set errmsg str_replace "_" " " join #errmsg str_replace "%s" #name var #desc;
die #errmsg;
endif;

Once I know Opulent Chess is updated, I will copy fairychess-test to fairychess and switch back to including fairychess in my games. Then I'll notify Greg, who can do the same. I'm not going to worry about breaking Apothecary Chess, because that's still a work in progress anyway, but Aurelian should be doing the same things for his games too. This is just a quick how-to. I will update the documentation later.

Sorry about that. If you check the comments on this site, you'll see that I've been very active. I sometimes delay and procrastinate moving when it seems like I am in a difficult position, because it takes more thinking. I have mainly been thinking about programming and have been trying to make time for some library books. I will try to get back to our game soon.

I have now updated the documentation.

I'm really glad to read your answer. One can understand that in this tense period when so many people are suffering from CoVID19 all around the world, a sudden break of communication is worrying. For reasons I don't know, I had not seen your message of 2020-04-06 before I posted mine, otherwise I wouldn't have done it. The simplest would have been just to answer my PM e-mail anyway. I hope you will resume our game where you invited me. Thanks a lot.

I've updated this preset but it no longer works at all:

https://www.chessvariants.com/play/pbm/play.php?game=Opulent+Chess&settings=AbstractNew

It's not finding the -Range function for something, but the debug information is almost useless to me.  At a guess, maybe it is because I am trying to alias Knight to the Knight_Wazir and Knight has other meanings.  Just a guess.

I came on this page and I am horrified to read what I read.

"In H.J.R. Murray's History of Chess, page 181 states that the Alfonso manuscript was published in about the year 1211" >> no, not 1211! Murray wrote it right: 1283. 

"which on page 346 is said to have used algebraic notation, and to have described a chess variant that included the modern B and Q": not at all!
That chess variant wich used algerbric notation and modern move is another one, from India, written in Persian and dated 1796-8. It is reported quite clear in Murray page 181 for who has eyes to read!

Page 348, Murray gave a short description of Grant Acedrex from King Alfonso X.Today this is better known thanks to the PhD work of Sonja Musser. I worked a bit with her on this, this is reported in my book A World of Chess (McFarland, 2017). In few words: what was called Unicornio in medieval spanish was clearly a Rhinoceros. So the Rhino was a piece first jumping like a Knight, then going away like a Bishop.

It was the counterpart of another piece moving one step diagonal then moving away on rows and columns. That later piece is called Aanca in the manuscript. It's an Arabic word, not Spanish, designating a giant Eagle or prey bird, from oriental legends (able to carry elephants). This was mistakenly traduced by Gryphon by Murray. This is unfortunate as the Gryphon was a very different legendary animal. This is why I prefer to use the name of Eagle in Metamachy and not Gryphon to avoid replicating that mistake.
 

"Not described there is a piece which makes a one step Rook move and then continues outwards as a Bishop. For lack of a name, I'll call it the Aanca." 
No no no please! Aanca is the Giant Eagle, or the Gryphon if you want. Do not give that name of Aanca to a piece which is different and is more like the Unicornio / Rhinoceros. This is a very very bad idea. Stop adding confusion, I wish one is more careful when reading the work of Murray.

It looks like you haven't set the constants for your Pawns.

The Japanese Wikipedia article on Sho Shogi also describes Asakura Shogi, which is the "missing link" between Sho Shogi and modern Shogi, played with both suizou and drops. To prevent complications, a captured suizou leaves the game entirely and may not be dropped; the same goes for the king of a player with a promoted suizou.

I think the existence of Asakura Shogi casts some doubts on the idea that the removal of the suizou and the introduction of drops are inherently linked.

Okay, I have done that. One more thing you need to do is change setconst to resetconst, at least temporarily. This is because constants get stored in game logs, and ongoing games will still use the old constant values if you use setconst instead of resetconst.

Dear HGM, I'm sorry to disagree with your demonstration.

It is very unfair to say that the "Spanish abuse the word Alfil". This is denying chess history. First we largely owe the Spanish to have transmitted to the rest of Europe chess from the Arabs in the years 950-1000. Alfil in Arabic is/was "al fil" which means "the elephant". It stayed in Spanish as Alfil, and was adopted in France as "fol" in Occitan, then "fou" in French, meaning "fol". Due to the shape of the piece, also borrowed from the Arabs, with 2 protuberances for the tusks, it was assimilated to a bishop's miter by Englishmen. So the Spanish just kept the name. The move was only modified 500 years later, also first in Spain! It is not because some American and English chessvariant lovers decided to revive the world Alfil in the 20th century that Spanish have abused whatever. 
Consider that Russians are calling the bishop a "slon" which also means elephant in Russia! Russia for chess is something no? Spanish are not so wrong  after all. But OK, I will not say that English are abusing :=)

I would agree with you that it would be difficult to forget the Gryphon or Griffon for CV lovers, but Aanca no. Aanca is Anka in Arabic and is what I said, a legendary giant Eagle, found in The 1001 Night Tales. In context of chess, it is found in Alfonso X's codex where it has clearly the move of what you call the Griffon. And shall I need to remind that Alfonso X was not writing in modern English but in medieval Castilian. (tired to read that the world griffon is found in the Libro de los juegos from king Alfonso >> it is not!).

Actually, the same Alfonso described a piece, in the same Grant Acedrex, almost moving like W followed by diagonals. Actually, it was just skiping the W squares, first jumping like a knight to the diagonal. That was an Unicornio, that it is demonstrated that it meant a Rhinoceros. Alfonso didn't have access to Wikipedia to check what a Rhino is. So, rather than Aanca, Rhinoceros would be a much better name. This is what I selected for Zanzibar chess. 

Calling that piece an Aanca, is like calling the a Bishop a Rook. Absurd.