Author: Peter McKenzie
Date: 23:42:31 06/27/01
Go up one level in this thread
On June 27, 2001 at 20:28:22, Christophe Theron wrote: >On June 27, 2001 at 18:30:54, John Smith wrote: > >>The Tiger I tested was the Lokasoft gui. I may be wrong, but I feel that the >>lokasoft/rebel version is stronger than the CB version. I have both the CB and >>Rebel/lokasoft, and I find the CB version to be weaker. Again, this is my >>opinion. > > >They have exactly the same DLL (the DLL is the executable files that contains >the engine)! Just curious about how your engine interfaces with the CB GUI, I see a number of possibilities: A) your engine DLL already implements the CB engine interface API (unlikely I would think) B) your engine DLL implements the Lokasoft engine interface API, in which case there are two possibilities I can think of: B1) the CB GUI calls the lokasoft API directly (this also seems unlikely) since I'd say CB want to keep their GUI code pretty much the same for all of their products (Fritz, Junior etc). B2) the CB GUI uses its own API to call a translation DLL which translates the CB API call into a call to the Lokasoft API. Of course the translation DLL would have to then translates the results into CB format and pass them back to CB. This solution is analagous to the CB Winboard adaptor. So which one is it? Or is it something different? If it is B2, I could imagine quite alot of scope for weakening the overall playing strength of the GUI/Engine combination. You only have to look at the history of the CB Winboard adaptor to see some of the problems that are possible... I hope this question isn't too sensitive to answer accurately :-) > >The only difference is the opening book. > > > > Christophe
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.