Author: Georg v. Zimmermann
Date: 02:56:35 12/30/01
Go up one level in this thread
This is the reason why I am very happy with Tim Mann having compatibility as #1 goal. The feature way of extending a protocol is the way to go ! I hope that old commands like "white" or "black" will never be abolished, since I rely on them and I am not interested in changing my protocol implementation, there are many more interesting things to work on for me :). Georg On December 29, 2001 at 19:59:30, José Carlos wrote: > I posted this in winboard forum some time ago, but I got zero answers, so I >think I can try, though it is a winboard question: > >[quote] > >I've decided to start a new thread about this because I think it is important. >My question is: what should I do in case the GUI does not support a given >feature? >I understand that, if I want my engine to run under any wb protocol 2 compatible >GUI, I must implement code for both possibilities for any feature, accepted or >rejected. In the case discussed in the other thread: usermove. >If I implemented usermove was just to avoid having to parse any command and try >to guess if it is a legal move. With usermove, I know that the token following >it, _must_ be a move. >If I implement the possibility of usermove rejected, then why should I also >implement usermove accepted? >As for other features, what am I suppose to do if the GUI rejects it? If I >support 'setboard' but the GUI doesn't, I simply can't set a board position. >Nothing I can do about. If I support SAN but the GUI doesn't, either I must >implement algebraic (in which case, why would I also implement SAN?) or simple I >can't run under that GUI. >My point is, if I (chess engine) must implement both possibilities (accepted and >rejected), then it's easyer to only implement the rejected, and not use SAN or >usermove. >The possibility of both GUI and program implementing protocol partially means a >bunch of compatibility problems, IMO. >What if a GUI implements a new feature such as handling the book. If I implement >that feature in Averno: >- is correct to call Averno wb-proto2 compatible? >- is that GUI wb-proto2 compatible? >- why the hell would I implement such a feature if I have to consider the >possibility that the feature is rejected, and then handle the book myself? > >José C. > >[end quote] > > The 'usermove' thread mentioned was about Scid, which is supposed to be wb >protocol 2 compatible, but doesn't support 'usermove' and doesn't even 'reject' >the feature. > > José C.
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.