Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 15:05:14 08/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 21, 2002 at 17:33:05, Bas Hamstra wrote: >You are not the only one of course, I remember having problems too, and NEVER >have been 100% satisfied EVER about my WB code. I got it to work only after I >got stuck a couple of times first, and finally realized it was a tough job and >it simply can't be done right in a couple of hours. Got a command. Wait, AM I >pondering? If yes, do I have to stop the search? Oops, it pondered to mate, it >is not searching. Different case. But uhm, do I have to retract that pondermove? >Depends on the command. Mindboggling. Yes, not everyone is intelligent enough to implement this kind of super complex protocol where you have to keep track of more than 10 variables. Absolutely mindboggling... Maybe the new slogan for UCI should be, "The protocol for the non-programmer". >WB is great of course and a *immense* success. Best free app ever and I hope >they keep maitaning the source. But UCI shows that some things can and should be >done really more simple and elegant. Do you not understand the purpose of such a protocol? The purpose is to provide a standard, graphical way for a text based engine to communicate with a user, or another engine, or an ICS. The protocol should not be intrusive upon the engine, at all. Russell
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.