Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 19:19:36 09/10/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 10, 1998 at 21:14:21, Keith Ian Price wrote: >On September 10, 1998 at 13:11:24, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On September 09, 1998 at 21:26:18, Keith Ian Price wrote: >> >>>I don't buy that as a valid excuse for not adapting a new standard. You could >>>keep the already written Auto232 capacity for backward compatiblity, while >>>adding the new features to get people (like me) to upgrade. I will buy any chess >>>engine so long as it is as strong as Rebel Decade, and has these features of >>>ICC/FICS compatiblity, e-mail compatibility, and network compatibility. Even >>>though I said that I would not pay $100 for Crafty, I would if it had a UI and >>>these features. Computer chess strength is secondary to me. Chess strength can't >>>be determined by how a program plays against other programs, only strength in >>>computer chess. Features like this are what I would like. Chess System Tal is >>>much more fun to play than any of the supposedly stronger programs, but if the >>>Windows version has only a Windows interface and a stronger engine, I won't be >>>buying it, since it won't be any more fun for me to use than the one I have >>>already. I am probably in the minority with this view, but there it is... >>> >>>kp >> >> >> >>I agree totally. the Auto232 standard is gross. Completely gross. There are >>many better ways to accomplish this task. First problem is that the message >>format is rediculous, with the original auto232 interface not supporting *real* >>chess since it didn't allow underpromotion. Then there were the timing issues >>that resulted in hangs when a program moved too quickly. Cryptic move format >>requiring a tab here, no tab there, etc... > >The hangs are what I hate most in the current standard. I see that you agreed >totally with how I think about Auto232, without me stating it this time. Did you >remember my previous posts on the subject, or did you merely read my mind? > no mind reading. You have no idea how much time I spent to get the bare auto232 (dos) stuff to work. it works on machine a, fails on a faster machine, works in normal games, but not with pondering, works without a book, works with a book, depending on the speed of the disk, works without tablebases, but not with, because crafty can read and move too fast and hangs auto232. IE, anything with a timing dependency is rediculous in this day and time. Code can be written without such problems... >>None of it made any sense from a software engineering point of view. I would >>be more than happy to sit down with a group and work out a standard >>communication interface that is easy to implement, easy to parse, and easy to >>understand how it is supposed to work. >> >>We ought to be able to also provide some basic software that will let this work >>on both unix and windows boxes (IE I can do the unix part myself, and we can >>take that to make a "auto232" library that anyone using unix can call). I have >>been trying to study the windows auto232 interface, but it is a nightmare, >>still, because it uses the old auto232 message format with two levels of parsing >>(which makes little sense). IE I send a somewhat cryptic message to the driver >>(cryptic because of a byzantine format) that the driver then modifies and sends >>to the other driver over the interface, which has to modify that to send it to >>the engine, which has to modify that to interpret what the devil it means. >> >>That is not necessary. And there is *no* sense in thinking "windoze" only for >>this interface, because it can work linux to windows, and linux to linux, as >>well as windows to windows, if done correctly. > >Sounds good to me. I use OS/2, but I will be getting Linux soon. > >>Anyone interested? Shareware/Freeware guys want to take the lead here and do >>this right, once and for all? > >I'd like to be included in the discussion of the standard. There should be some >attention paid to keeping the clocks in sync, however this might best be done. > someone suggested the xboard/winboard engine interface. That might well be a decent start. It allows for clock updates and so forth. All we have to do is do something that prevents "cheating" there of course.. >kp
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.