Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 09:23:40 03/16/05
Go up one level in this thread
On March 16, 2005 at 05:37:40, Tim Foden wrote: >On March 15, 2005 at 17:58:41, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On March 15, 2005 at 17:02:52, F. Huber wrote: >> >>>On March 15, 2005 at 16:34:50, Dann Corbit wrote: >>> >>>>On March 15, 2005 at 15:57:51, F. Huber wrote: >>>> >>>>>On March 15, 2005 at 15:43:27, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On March 15, 2005 at 15:40:33, F. Huber wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>On March 15, 2005 at 13:54:46, Dann Corbit wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>The UCI protocol is flawed because it does not store the engine setup >>>>>>>>information. You have to communicate this stuff every time. Still, this part >>>>>>>>of the UCI protocol is clearly better than Winboard, because it at least is >>>>>>>>uniform. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Hi Dann, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>there´s absolutely nothing flawed in the UCI protocol, at least not in your >>>>>>>mentioned problem of storing the engine setup! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The reason why this ´setup storing´ can´t be found anywhere in the UCI protocol, >>>>>>>is simply that this is either the task of the GUI _or_ the engine itself - >>>>>>>whoever wants to implement this! >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Do you need examples? >>>>>> >>>>>>Yes, by all means. >>>>>> >>>>>>>Well, e.g. Arena actually stores _every_ engine option in the registry! >>>>>> >>>>>>And it should be in a database. >>>>> >>>>>Is the registry no database? >>>> >>>>Not really. And it does not exist for UNIX and the MAC (or any other platform). >>>> >>>>>>>And e.g. ChestUCI has its own INI-file, where it also stores all of its >>>>>>>settings (moreover you can even specify the ´behaviour´ of this INI-file >>>>>>>in 3 different ways with a special commandline parameter for ChestUCI)! >>>>>> >>>>>>And what a horrible place to do it. >>>>> >>>>>Again, is a INI-file no database? >>>>>(BTW, the user has absolutely nothing to do with ChestUCI´s INI-file!) >>>>> >>>>>This time you´re really speaking _nonsense_! :-( >>>> >>>>An ini file is not a database. >>>>It is the wrong place to store these parameters. >>>>Let me repeat, I have literally hundreds of chess engines. >>>>Will I want to edit an ini file for each and every revision of each and every >>>>engine? >>>> >>>>Storing things in ini files (where each ini file is different) is bad, bad, bad. >>>> >>>>And did I mention bad? >>>> >>>>It is annoying, unhelpful, harmful, irritating, and awful. >>>> >>>>It belongs in a consistent database. Anything else is just plain wrong. >>> >>>Well I see: either you _don´t_ get the point, or you don´t _want_ to get it! >>> >>>Did I say anywhere, that the _user_ should _edit_ these INI files at all? NO! >>> >>>Of course the user simply changes all engine settings in a configuration window >>>within the chess GUI! >>>But if these settings are stored by the GUI or the engine - or - >>>if these settings are stored in a INI-file, the registry, a ´database´ (whatever >>>_you_ would call so) or in anything else, is completely indifferent for the >>>user! >>> >>>Got it now? ;-) >> >>Chess GUI one (e.g. Arena) has to do this. >>Chess GUI two (e.g. Jose) has to do this. >>Chess GUI three (e.g. Knights) has to do this. >>Chess GUI four (e.g. ChessBase) has to do this. >>Chess GUI five (e.g. ChessAssistant) has to do this. >>Chess GUI six (e.g. Winboard) has to do this. >> >>It it clear that it is lunacy to have to reprogram this every time? >> >>It it clear that it is too much work to get every parameter for every program >>correctly performed in this way? >> >>To use something besides a database is the wrong way to do it. >> >>It a database, we have consistency. An ini file will not ensure consistency. >>In a database, we have rules and contraints and triggers. An ini file cannot >>perform rules, contstraints or triggers. >>In a database, we have indexes. An ini file will do a sequential scan. >> >>In a database, we can create a uniform, simple interface. >> >>There is a billion dollars worth of effort to write a good database. >>Your ini files will never duplicate it. > >I'm a little confused as to the purpose of your database idea. Maybe the >following 2 questions would help to clafify it? > >Is it true that you are proposing this for the GUI to store it's info about the >engines? Yes. >This would seem like an OK idea. It's a really good idea. But I can't communicate how valuable it is in such a way that other people understand it. If they did, everyone would instantly jump on the bandwagon. >Initially in the discussion it seemed like you were proposing this as a way for >the engines to communicate with the GUI. Is this true? Some sorts of communications information could be stored (language translation tables, maybe even grammar). But I am not proposing a database as a replacement for TCP/IP or pipes. >This would seem like a bad idea. (AFAIK :) > >Cheers, Tim.
This page took 0.01 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.