Author: martin fierz
Date: 02:43:27 07/03/01
Go up one level in this thread
On July 02, 2001 at 15:00:33, Adam Oellermann wrote: >On July 02, 2001 at 13:55:37, martin fierz wrote: > >>On July 02, 2001 at 12:44:05, Dan Andersson wrote: >> >>>There is nothing inherently wrong in using dll's. I myself much prefer a clean >>>API. But STDIO is IMO a bit more portable to different platforms. >> >>of course you are right about stdio being more portable. but since checkerboard >>is a windows-only program, i didnt care very much about portability :-) >>besides, a specified function interface is portable too. the only thing i can >>think of which is bad is that i need to change lots of things if i plan to >>change my protocol. with stdio you can just add a new command which old engines >>may not be able to parse, and to which they can answer that they dont know it. i >>have to go looking in the dll if a function is there, and that is a bit more >>overhead. > >My biggest objection to the DLL model is that doing pondering etc seemed like it >would be, well, tricky. I could be wrong - I didn't look at it in a great amount right, pondering is not possible in CB. then again, i'm not really interested in pondering. if i was, i could add another function call telling the engine to ponder. >of detail. Besides, the STDIO approach is *easy* to implement from any >programming language, in an OS-agnostic way. maybe, but i still don't see how you beat a simple function call :-) and it's only maybe for me because i really don't know how to do that in windows... else i might have done it that way. cheers martin
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.