Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: UCI versus Winboard

Author: Russell Reagan

Date: 15:23:14 08/21/02

Go up one level in this thread


On August 21, 2002 at 17:57:36, Dann Corbit wrote:

>A Winboard interface is reinvented for each and every chess engine written.
>Doesn't it seem like we are reinventing the wheel every time?

So what do you think needs to happen? Update the Winboard protocol? Create a new
protocol which would support Winboard and UCI? Something else?

IMO Winboard will die out (maybe not for many years) if it is not updated and
the complaints about it solved. Winboard is like Unix, and if it continues to
evolve to meet the appropriate needs, it will last like Unix.

What about a protocol that allows configuration by each engine? For example,
there could be certain "standard" protocol commands, then the engine could
"create" commands. For example, if the engine author has an anti-human mode, it
could "add" this to the protocol (maybe by sending a "create" command to the
GUI), and the GUI could add it to the menu, and the user could select Anti-human
Mode from the menu, or whatever. Just an idea, might not be a good one.

Perhaps if the engine could "create" commands in this way, you could have two
config files, one for Winboard that "adds" the Winboard commands to the
protocol, and one for UCI that adds those commands. As long as there were the
basic support for standard commands, such as making a move, reseting the game,
etc., the user could add any additional commands he/she would like.

Clearly I think something needs to happen. Thoughts?

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.