Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 15:28:03 01/25/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 25, 2002 at 18:17:40, Walter Eigenmann wrote: >>>From all that I've read about UCI, it seems to have several technical advantages >>>over Winboard. >> >>Name one. > >Look at this: > >" What are the advantages of UCI compared to Winboard? > >1. All engine options can be modified within the graphical user interface >so there is no need to deal with ini files. That's up to the engine in WB. That is not a problem of the protocol. The engine could setup itself. >2. Much better capabilities to display search information of the engine >3. Definition of a principal variation is included, 2 and 3 are similar and related to 5. This is real. >4. It's more robust, the GUI always knows exactly what the engine is doing. That implies a lot of disadvantages. In fact, I do not like that. >5. It supporting multi variation mode see above. >6. Support for endgame tablebases That should be up to the engine! >7. Flexible time controls Real, it will be gone with WB 3 >8. The engine can identify itself This was posted before WB 2, this is not true anymore. >9. UCI is supporting a copy protection mechanism (for the professionals)" Not very important IMHO. Regards, Miguel >(in: Aaron Tay, http://www.chesskit.com/aarontay/Winboard/Winboard5.html#[E.10] > >Walter
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.