Author: Tony Werten
Date: 22:42:18 02/23/05
Go up one level in this thread
On February 23, 2005 at 07:29:28, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>On February 23, 2005 at 00:19:49, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On February 22, 2005 at 23:19:35, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On February 22, 2005 at 22:12:40, Norm Pollock wrote:
>>>
>>>>On February 22, 2005 at 19:07:22, Peter Skinner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On February 22, 2005 at 17:53:46, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On February 22, 2005 at 14:22:25, Matthias Gemuh wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On February 22, 2005 at 13:52:41, Brian Kostick wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On February 22, 2005 at 13:33:24, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On February 22, 2005 at 13:29:39, M Soszynski wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Where can I download the latest Crafty UCI engine?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Crafty has a Winboard interface. But you can play it as a UCI engine with an
>>>>>>>>>adapter.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>Or you could bolt Pepito's nifty UCI interface onto crafty in about 5 minutes.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Dann,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I would like to see this become common, UCI Crafty. Will all permissions of
>>>>>>>>course correctly. I wish so many compiler operators quit fooling around and do
>>>>>>>>something real like this. :)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>>>>Brian
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I don't "hate" it, I just don't like it a whole lot. :)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>It takes too much control away from the engine and empowers the UI with more
>>>>>>than I personally think is reasonable. In today's software world, the right
>>>>>>approach is to take the minimum functionality possible away from the engine, and
>>>>>>for the set of all programs, this "minimum functionality" has to be a common
>>>>>>subset that is taken from all engines. I don't believe it reasonable for the UI
>>>>>>to handle the opening book, book learning, endgame tables, tell me what to
>>>>>>ponder, when to ponder, how long to ponder, and so forth. I already have the
>>>>>>code to handle all of that built in, and I see no reason to take it out as then
>>>>>>I lose winboard functionality, or else I have spaghetti code that does this for
>>>>>>that UI, this for those UIs, and so forth.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>I want the UI to be the "user interface" only. Not play chess. Not make time
>>>>>>allocation decisions. Not tell me how long to think and when to stop searching
>>>>>>or start pondering, I want my program to make _all_ playing decisions and just
>>>>>>use the UI to tell the opponent what it played...
>>>>>>
>>>>>>That is why I don't like UCI.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>GO BOB!!!
>>>>>
>>>>>I totally agree. Even the engines that I have that support both protocals, I use
>>>>>the Winboard one.
>>>>>
>>>>>It is easier, allows the engine to make all the decisions.
>>>>>
>>>>>UCI is like Kramnik letting me make the moves for him. While it might be fun, he
>>>>>wouldn't be in the top 100 after long :)
>>>>>Peter
>>>>
>>>>If an engine is to make all the decisions, then should the engine use an opening
>>>>book and end-game tablebases? It seems to me that once you take away the opening
>>>>and the ending from the engine, you can take other things too.
>>>
>>>
>>>You can take whatever you want I suppose. But winboard/xboard does not do
>>>anything but "GUI" functions. The engine is responsible for _everything_ as it
>>>should be. A GUI that handles the book is (IMHO) NFG for tournament play, as
>>>book selection code is one of those "same input many output" functions that can
>>>not be copied from one program to another.
>>>
>>>Hint: Commercial Chess Programmers - this is simply a poor idea...
>>
>>Bob,
>>engines can be responsible for everything also under the UCI protocol
>>The GUI does not control something that the engine does not want.
>>
>>This is from engine-interface.txt (if you have not it then you can download it
>>in http://www.shredderchess.com/download.html(look at the bottom of that page)
>>
>>* by default all the opening book handling is done by the GUI,
>> but there is an option for the engine to use its own book ("OwnBook" option,
>>see below)
>>
>>* <id> = OwnBook, type check
>> this means that the engine has its own book which is accessed by the engine
>>itself.
>> if this is set, the engine takes care of the opening book and the GUI will
>>never
>> execute a move out of its book for the engine. If this is set to false by the
>>GUI,
>> the engine should not access its own book.
>>
>>
>
>The problem is that the engine _can_ let the GUI handle the book. If that is
>considered acceptable, then we should totally stop discussing the "clone" issue
>and tell everyone "copy and enter what you want". Because according to the
>definition that I believe makes some sense, "copy things that are fixed output
>for fixed input" the opening book move selection code is not "fixed output for
>fixed input" at all...
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>
>>Note also that the engine has full freedom what to do about pondering:
>>
>>It is from the same text:
>>* ponder
>> start searching in pondering mode.
>> Do not exit the search in ponder mode, even if it's mate!
>> This means that the last move sent in in the position string is the ponder
>>move.
>> The engine can do what it wants to do, but after a "ponderhit" command
>> it should execute the suggested move to ponder on. This means that the ponder
>>move sent by
>> the GUI can be interpreted as a recommendation about which move to ponder.
>>However, if the
>> engine decides to ponder on a different move, it should not display any
>>mainlines as they are
>> likely to be misinterpreted by the GUI because the GUI expects the engine to
>>ponder
>> on the suggested move.
>
>
>
>Seems like pretty clear garbage to me... "can do what it wants"... "should not
>display". Etc. Too many shoulda/coulda/woulda's.
>
>Particularly for tournaments or events where the programs compete with each
>other rather than competing against humans only.
I think this is all just secondary problems (though valid ones).
I'm just not going to tell my pv and pondermove to a commercial interface sold
by the same company that sells chessengines connected to that interface.
There is no way of checking wether the other engine has a special command for
the interface like "give me the opponent pondermove, so I can do an extension on
it" or something the like.
Tony
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.