Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Draft of revised xboard/winboard engine protocol

Author: Peter McKenzie

Date: 13:25:04 12/08/00

Go up one level in this thread


On December 08, 2000 at 13:53:12, Stefan Meyer-Kahlen wrote:

>
>
>This is not what I wanted to see happen after publishing our UCI engine <-> user
>interface protocol. Winboard hasn’t moved for years and now that our protocol is
>published for a week suddenly all the improvements we added in UCI are copied to
>winboard. I published UCI to have ONE clear and easy engine protocol. Well, UCI
>is free, but still I don’t really like that.

Winboard/xboard protocol has been gradually evolving, just look at the spec and
see the various features things that have been replaced by better methods (eg.
'...' vs 'move' for sending a move to winboard/xboard).  Still, I'd say that by
releasing your spec you effectively gave the winboard thing a 'hurry up'.

Its unrealistic that you publish a spec. and automatically expect everyone to
just convert to it.

If you really want UCI to catch on, you might consider writing a winboard/UCI
translator what would allow people to run UCI engines inside winboard.  That
shouldn't be too hard.

cheers,
Peter

>
>Stefan



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.