The u is in the right place; unloading occurs on the start square of the move, unlike the other mode modifiers, which specify a condition on the destination.
I suppose I must still make the preprocessor that handles the bracket notation recognize the S and T, though; in translation to normal XBetza every leg in your move would have to be expressed in K steps, and it must know how many.
[Edit] OK, the S and T should now also work in the bracket notation as first leg, when a step or slide follows. Like K it works in a bit of a kludgy way; it determines the range of the leap, but the symmetry is actually determined by the atom in the second leg. So if you used K there, it would already have interpreted and A, D, G or H as if they were S or T. Based on the reasoning that if the first leg was a 4-fold atom, no matter how you bend, you would always know whether the next leg is orthogonal or diagonal, and use the corresponding 4-fold atom there rather than K.
Using X in the first leg of a bracket notation does not work yet.
KY is not supposed to work. I can find no logical meaning for it. Oblique moves already are 8-fold symmetric, and you can make all such move sets by extending the regular 4-fold atoms. To extend the radial 8-fold atoms to larger distance the X is already enough.
The u is in the right place; unloading occurs on the start square of the move, unlike the other mode modifiers, which specify a condition on the destination.
I suppose I must still make the preprocessor that handles the bracket notation recognize the S and T, though; in translation to normal XBetza every leg in your move would have to be expressed in K steps, and it must know how many.
[Edit] OK, the S and T should now also work in the bracket notation as first leg, when a step or slide follows. Like K it works in a bit of a kludgy way; it determines the range of the leap, but the symmetry is actually determined by the atom in the second leg. So if you used K there, it would already have interpreted and A, D, G or H as if they were S or T. Based on the reasoning that if the first leg was a 4-fold atom, no matter how you bend, you would always know whether the next leg is orthogonal or diagonal, and use the corresponding 4-fold atom there rather than K.
Using X in the first leg of a bracket notation does not work yet.
KY is not supposed to work. I can find no logical meaning for it. Oblique moves already are 8-fold symmetric, and you can make all such move sets by extending the regular 4-fold atoms. To extend the radial 8-fold atoms to larger distance the X is already enough.