Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 10:51:25 01/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 23, 2002 at 16:45:58, Roy Eassa wrote: >On January 23, 2002 at 16:31:08, John Merlino wrote: > >>On January 23, 2002 at 16:10:53, William Penn wrote: >> >>>On January 23, 2002 at 12:11:15, John Merlino wrote: >>> >>>>On January 23, 2002 at 05:50:54, Jonas Cohonas wrote: >>>> >>>>>Now that CB has integrated UCI with their latest patch, will The King in the >>>>>future support UCI, say from version 9000? >>>>> >>>>>Regards >>>>>Jonas >>>> >>>>There are currently no plans to support UCI with the next version of >>>>Chessmsater. >>>> >>>>jm >>> >>>Good for you. Keep it as simple as possible! The more unnecessary code/features >>>you can cut out (or prevent) the better... >>>WP >> >>Your opinion is generally in the minority, but we agree with you on this one. >> > > >Keeping out unnecessary GUI features is one thing. Leaving out support for THE >best/newest standard for chess engines is another. UCI is gaining tremendous >momentum -- even Chessbase has signed on. Why be behind your competitors with a >feature that will you will ultimately implement anyway? Maybe because the winboard protocol is just as good or better? And it is a _lot_ older...
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.