Author: Keith Evans
Date: 21:21:23 07/05/05
Go up one level in this thread
>That is why in competition an independent interface should be used. Propriatory >format engines should become UCI or Winboard compatible when participating in >tournaments. > >That is fair to all and then there can be no ambiguity. > >People will stop at nothing to win you see. > >If it is a level playing field, there can be no doubt as to which engine is the >winner. > >That is one of our points. The other is even simpler. > >If you make a chess engine.......it should know the rules of chess. > >All of them. > >:-) > >Christopher I think that most people reading these messages in CCC would rather that time be spent making programs like the King SMP capable, rather than implementing features like checking for more than 1 king per side that will have absolutely no benefit whatsoever to the end user. There is never enough time to implement all of the requested features much less the bug fixes, and would you honestly give this priority over other any other tasks? How would you sell this to management? How will this change benefit the end user? As a verification engineer I can respect your attitude in finding these bugs, but I would definitely defer to sales and marketing types and set the priority of these types of bugs to the lowest priority.
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.