Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Is UCI a politically viable alternative to Winboard?

Author: Roy Eassa

Date: 12:36:22 01/26/02

Go up one level in this thread


On January 26, 2002 at 01:27:58, Thomas Mayer wrote:

>Let's get over to the disadvantages of UCI:
>
>1. Not useable as console mode language for testing the engine
>2. Not open for new ideas in engine programming, simply the strict protocol does
>not allow e.g. different pondering ideas etc.
>3. Book learning nearly impossible, only with some vague guesses and in next
>game, so engine will loose time because of learning, same to position learning
>4. External own books not visibel
>5. Using the engine on ics's not possible
>6. No free GUI so far for it
>7. No discussion forum about extensions for the feature
>8. No protocol version system
>9. No way for the engine to see whether opponent is computer or human
>

Until now, I'd seen a list of the advantages of UCI many times, but criticisms
of UCI have appeared to be political only.  Thank you for posting this list and
making it clear that there is more than politics in play here.



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.