Author: Matthew White
Date: 12:43:47 07/23/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 23, 2003 at 15:29:01, Tord Romstad wrote: >On July 23, 2003 at 14:51:24, Steve Maughan wrote: > >>Tord & Ed, >> >>>But the lazy programmers are precisely the ones who should prefer the UCI >>>protocol. I have implemented both protocols in my program during the last >>>month, and the UCI protocol was by far the easiest one! >> >>I agree with Tord. I've implemented Winboard and UCI in Monarch and UCI is >>*FAR* easier to implement. I would suggest that it would take no more than 4 >>hours to implement UCI in Rebel. I think Bas Hamstra has also made similar >>comments. > >I should perhaps also add that I implemented UCI mostly without being able >to test it myself. I do all development in MacOS X and Linux, and have no >UCI-compatible GUI in which I could test UCI mode. I had to rely on >some very helpful beta testers in order to get bug reports and solve >UCI-related problems. Despite this, UCI mode was easier to implement than >xboard mode. > >Tord Have you tried Knights in Linux? It works pretty well... You have to have Kde 3, IIRC, but it might come in handy for your testing :). You can get it here: http://knights.sourceforge.net/ Matt
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.