Author: Thomas Mayer
Date: 03:58:26 03/10/05
Go up one level in this thread
Hi Volker, >> In UCI, can anyone justify why the entire move history has to be sent for >> each move? > The protocol does not require to send the whole move list. It is perfectly > legal just to send fen string and up to 50 moves. That is enough state > information for the engine and the protocol allows this. So you would lose all information about repetition, fifty move etc. (okay, fifty move can be sent by the fen string - but still the problem with repetitions) what I simply do not like in the UCI interface is that in my opinion too much chess dependant stuff is done by the GUI and not by the engine. Especially draw claim, resigning etc. -> I WANT that my engine decides wether it wants to resign or not or wether it claims a draw or not. Also I still think that opening book, book learning etc. should be part of the engine and not part of the GUI... Book functions are not trivial and when I use a GUI and it's book functions I use the efforts of someone else. Anyway, WinBoard would need for sure some better specifications and some additions... I hope for the future. Afaik Steffen Jakob has made once a suggestion to make options changeable also in WinBoard. IMO the WinBoard protocol is still the better one from the sight of the engine / programmer - it is simply more flexibel. For users it is different... Greets, Thomas
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.