Author: Torstein Hall
Date: 17:58:59 01/26/02
Go up one level in this thread
On January 26, 2002 at 01:27:58, Thomas Mayer wrote: >Hi Walter, > >> 1. All engine options can be modified within the graphical user interface >> so there is no need to deal with ini files. > >well, a) this is a GUI question, b) maybe for the future this will be a part of >an upcoming new winboard specification > >>2. Much better capabilities to display search information of the engine > >except the hashtable-usage, there is everything in winboard spec II - and the >hashtable-usage is something very unclear... > >>3. Definition of a principal variation is included, > >discussed at the moment for prot III > >>4. It's more robust, the GUI always knows exactly what the engine is doing. > >Well, I think the WinBoard GUI also knows exactly what the engine is doing... >don't see more robustness on the UCI-side > >>5. It supporting multi variation mode > >That IS an advantage, but I am sure that it will not take long then WB has it >also... > >>6. Support for endgame tablebases > >That's up to the engine... MANY WinBoard engines support egtbs... for sure more >then UCI-engines exists... or will ever exist, I believe... :) > >>7. Flexible time controls > >With prot spec. finally solved... Then WinBoard will have definitely more >different time controls then any other protocol... > >>8. The engine can identify itself > >That's also possible in WinBoard prot. II > >>9. UCI is supporting a copy protection mechanism (for the professionals)" > >WinBoard can do that to... just a checkbox with a "telluser" - check copy >protection - maybe another checkbox and finished... > >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 Care to explain the problem with learning. At least Pharaon has a position learning that looks like it is working OK with the UCI interface. Torstein >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 > >I could add more points if I want to this list, but what's that good for ? UCI >is not bad, but I don't see why it is so revolutionary that anyone should >switch... Some addings to the WinBoard-protocol will do the job also... and keep >the flexibility where it is needed: at the engine, not at the GUI... > >Greets, Thomas
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.