Author: Uri Blass
Date: 04:34:58 02/22/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 21, 2005 at 16:16:08, enrico carrisco wrote: >On February 21, 2005 at 10:19:47, Stefan Meyer-Kahlen wrote: > >>On February 17, 2005 at 11:57:18, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >> >>>On February 17, 2005 at 10:06:16, Peter Skinner wrote: >>> >>>>On February 17, 2005 at 06:44:44, Tony Werten wrote: >>>> >>>>>Please explain why you think that Shredder UCI is the one with the limited >>>>>functionality ? >>>>> >>>>>Tony >>>> >>>>It's not the one with limited functionality. In fact your able to use it in more >>>>interfaces. >>>> >>>>The problem is that you _don't_ get to use the proper book for it anywhere. >>>> >>>>With UCI it is supposed to be the "Universal" interface, yet the author of the >>>>standard limits the usage in his own engine. I just don't get it. >>> >>>The UCI design clearly puts the interface in control of quite a few things. Book >>>handling was one of them. By design UCI didn't provide for book usage outside >>>the GUI. The *possibility* to do so with "ownbook" was added afterwards, as I >>>understand it. There are some additional issues with learning that must be >>>dealth with when you use ownbook. Most people never seem to have gotten that >>>correct, and as a result there's now "ucinewgame". "Ownbook" has many more >>>limitations related to the GUI interaction and is basically an ugly hack. >>> >>>If you want own book access outside the native GUI, you must duplicate all book >>>code from the GUI into the engine. Or do all book handling natively, but then >>>the GUI can't have a nice book editor and so on. Or put all book handling code >>>in a DLL which both engine and GUI can access. >>> >>>Either solution is quite a bit of extra work. >>> >>>So please, stop asking yourself why Shredder, as the first UCI engine, doesn't >>>support "ownbook". The protocol was never intended to support that concept in >>>the first place. If it was, I'm sure the workings of it would be about 100000x >>>better than they are now. >>> >>>-- >>>GCP >> >> >>Thanks Gian-Carlo, this is pretty much my point of view. Still I know that there >>are many requests to use Shredder's book outside his GUI and I will try to find >>a solution to this. >> >>Stefan > >Considering Sandro's book is already among the best -- perhaps reinventing the >wheel on book learning at the engine level isn't necessary. I am not sure if I understand. When you say engine level you mean "Shredder engine level" because I see nothing that can prevent movei to use its own book under every interface and the same for most engines. The words "engine level" are confusing because I think automatically not only about shredder but about many engines Maybe just making >sure the same line isn't played repetitively to avoid possible book hole >exploits will suffice. > >Alternatively, one could make a more narrow book for the "ownbook" usage and >keep things simple. Again why you say one and not stefan. if I understand correctly it is relevant only for shredder. I guess that I do not understand what all this discussion is about. 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.