Author: José Carlos
Date: 07:32:57 12/09/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 09, 2003 at 10:27:19, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >On December 09, 2003 at 10:16:30, José Carlos wrote: > >>On December 09, 2003 at 10:09:33, Gian-Carlo Pascutto wrote: >> >>>On December 09, 2003 at 10:05:05, K. Burcham wrote: >>> >>>>GCP, are you saying that the program Jonny, and the operator of Jonny did not >>>>know about the repetition until informed by Mr. Z? >>>>are you saying that the program Jonny also could not detect the position had >>>>been played for the third time? >>> >>>Mr Zwanzer = Jonny programmer = Jonny operator >>> >>>Jonny did not know that a 3 fold repetition is a draw. >>> >>>-- >>>GCP >> >> The software playing under the name Jonny did know. If what the GUI says is >>ignored then don't let Jonny play under that GUI. Don't keep repeating that >>nonsense about the engine vs the GUI. One player, one playing unit, that's it. > >I think that combining a private engine with a commercial GUI on occasions like >this is very debatable. >It was a big case that one of the programs was suspected to use source code of >another one. Why should use of foreign code in binary form be acceptable ? I totally agree. No commercial GUI should be accepted in these cases. But if it is accepted, then it must be with all comsecuences. A different case is a free GUI like Winboard or Arena, which is intended to use by eveyrboy. It (IMO) must be accepted for every participant, but again GUI + engine must be considered as one playing unit. Finally, if no GUI is accepted (not even freeware ones) I'd find it also logical and programmers without an own GUI should play in console mode. José C. >Uli >> >> José C.
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.