Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:45:30 05/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 30, 2003 at 13:28:37, Sune Fischer wrote: >On May 30, 2003 at 12:51:15, Russell Reagan wrote: > >>On May 30, 2003 at 10:16:08, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >> >>>please thinking about your statement. >>>We have x beta testers and x programmers where help us with beta results. >>>Do you thinking that all of this persons make a bad work. >> >>Hi Frank, >> >>I don't think Uri meant there was anything wrong with the Arena software. I >>think he meant there are better default settings. For example, I too would >>prefer if automaitc adjudication and autoamtic draws were disabled by default. >>If I was running a big tournament like Leo, then maybe I would turn it on to >>save time, but if I am testing my own program, I want my program to play until >>the end of the game because I want to see how it plays and I want to find bugs >>in my program. I can change these settings, so it is no big deal, but if a new >>user tries his engine in Arena, he may not know about automatic adjudication and >>automatid draws, and he may waste a week trying to find a bug in his program >>(even though there is no bug). > >I agree the default setting in this case is a little unfortunate. > >Maybe it would also be better if Arena wrote directly "game adjurcated by Arena >as draw", rather than "draw agreed", which is misleading, at least for engines >that do actually offer and accept draws. > >Another thing I would like in Arena is the possibility to load and unload an >engine. Preferably by an icon, or if placed as a menu option give it a fast >shortcut. > >The reason is that when you need to recompile, you have to close the gui and >start it up again, which takes time. > >Arena also seems to be a little slow on starting up the engines, it takes 3-5 >secs, in winboard it takes less than 1 sec, it's so fast that I never notice it. >I'm not sure if this is arena's fault or mine, but it does seem to apply to all >engines. > >When two engines gets loaded they are started up one at a time and the total >startup time becomes borderline annoyingly long for my taste. Maybe it would be >possible to start them up in parallel? > >I use this dual analysis feature a lot, it is real nice to compare output from >two engines on the fly. :) > >I also think we will see more FRC-engines soon, now that there is a GUI to >support it. > >Personally I like the idea of generalizing the game, it forces one to abstract >one more level when coding the evaluation function. Things such as pawn >structure and center control must be rethought and generalized, possibly leading >to a better understanding of the essence of the game. > >-S. I do not see it. I do not think that programmers are going to change their pawn structure evaluation in fisher chess. I also do not have and do not plan to have in the near future center control evaluation. I plan to improve my search because I believe that it is more easy to get improvement in that area and not in evaluation. Uri
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.