Author: Matthias Gemuh
Date: 15:25:08 08/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On August 21, 2002 at 18:05:14, Russell Reagan wrote: >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 Not intrusive ? Then why does it sometimes send me a "go" command when I have received opponent's move, executed it and gone searching ? How do you "start engine clock", "start opponent's clock" (code snippet, please) ?
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.