Re: [Scidvspc-users] CQL port to Scid vs PC

[Lionel <hay...@gm...>]

On 11/15/2017 08:36 PM, Alan Whiteman wrote:
>
> Sorry for the naive questions, but to clarify:
>
> 1) You are providing the patch that needs to be applied to the 4.18
> tarball.

The 4.18.1 tarball, though either one will probably do just fine.

>
> 2) The CQL implementation will use scidvspc's built-in search gui, so no
> cli lines needed?
>

Correct.

> 3) If it proves to be a better search function, should Steve port it to
> the next version?
>

Depends on how you define better, and that's Steve's call.  There are 
good arguments to be made pro and con.  For any given query of 
equivalence, the native Scid query (header, material, pattern, etc), 
will be more efficient.  But the existing Scid search capability doesn't 
come close to the range and depth of the complexity allowed by a CQL query.


-- Lionel