Author: Vladimir Sokolov
Date: 01:05:43 11/29/00
Go up one level in this thread
On November 29, 2000 at 02:45:34, Stefan Meyer-Kahlen wrote: >On November 28, 2000 at 15:34:51, Edward Screven wrote: > >>i think your protocol has a lot to recommend it. in particular i >>like having search separated from play, having clock information >>made available as part of the "go" command, and having engine >>specific options exposed through the GUI. but i have one question >>and one objection. >> >>question: why is "position" a separate command, and not an argument >>to "go". as far as i can tell, there's nothing an engine is >>supposed to do with a position other than search it, and the >>engine isn't supposed to search until it receives a "go". so >>why not take the stateless nature of the protocol further and >>make the position information part of "go"? > >Yes, this was one point we also thought about as there will always be a >"position" command before a "go" command. We decided to keep it seperated as >both commands can be quite long. > >>objection: i strongly dislike the way pondering is supposed to work. >>i don't mind having a command that says "start pondering now", but >>the assumptions built into the protocol - that it is always a search >>based on an opponent move guess computed as a side affect of a >>previous search - are too limiting. what about the first move out >>of book? what if no guess move is immediately available because >>the previous search ended in a fail-high? in these cases my engine >>does a short search to guess at the opponent move, but it doesn't do >>that until it is time to start pondering. i don't see how to >>fit this into the uci protocol. > >You are right, but the engine can take the last move sent in a "go ponder" >command as a suggestion on what to do. It can ponder or do anything it likes, it >only has to execute that particular move after the "ponderhit" command. > >This is eqivalent to what we are doing if you take the move as a suggestion. see >above. > >Thanks for your comments. > > Stefan If UCI is really an equivalent to Winboard it is freely downloadable, or is it more exactly a protocol that functions like an adapter between engine and GUI ? Different Gui's, that can be modified by the user, can be built to function with the protocol, but the Gui of Shredder 5 is not downloadable, consequently the graphical user interface of Shredder 5 is not freely available.
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.