Suggestion to CCRL

Discussion of anything and everything relating to chess playing software and machines.

Moderators: bob, hgm, Harvey Williamson

Forum rules
This textbox is used to restore diagrams posted with the [d] tag before the upgrade.
Alayan
Posts: 309
Joined: Tue Nov 19, 2019 7:48 pm
Full name: Alayan Feh

Suggestion to CCRL

Post by Alayan » Sun Mar 15, 2020 4:52 am

Mark 32-bit engines as 32-bit, and remove "64-bit" from the name of 64-bit engines.

I compiled some stats on it when discussing this with Terje a few weeks back, and while a majority of tested engines had a 32-bit version, almost all engines in the top 100, along with all new engines entering the rating list, are 64-bits. For most users, this change would reduce clutter when looking at the list.

User avatar
Ovyron
Posts: 4245
Joined: Tue Jul 03, 2007 2:30 am

Re: Suggestion to CCRL

Post by Ovyron » Sun Mar 15, 2020 11:28 am

Good idea!

Gabor Szots
Posts: 490
Joined: Sat Jul 21, 2018 5:43 am
Location: Szentendre, Hungary
Full name: Gabor Szots

Re: Suggestion to CCRL

Post by Gabor Szots » Sun Mar 15, 2020 3:35 pm

Ovyron wrote:
Sun Mar 15, 2020 11:28 am
Good idea!
Yes it is but at the moment none of us has either the time or the capabilities to change it.
Gabor Szots
CCRL testing group

Modern Times
Posts: 2554
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:02 pm

Re: Suggestion to CCRL

Post by Modern Times » Sun Mar 15, 2020 4:00 pm

I've been thinking about this myself for quite a while. It used to be that 32-bit was the norm and 64-bit was the exception. Now it is the other way round. I'd certainly like to see us do this.

The issue is in the custom comparisons, where the absence of the "64-bit" tag in the engine names means they are treated as a 32-bit. Again things have moved on - no-one is interested in custom lists of just 32-bit engines, at least I don't think they are. We'd have to trawl through the Perl scripts and see what we could do. If the option to generate purely 32-bit custom lists was removed then I think things would be OK. Or else we find the code where the distinction is made between 32-bit and 64-bit engines and change that. Either way it requires some detailed investigation and I'll try and find the time to do that. There are close to 10,000 lines of code and comments in the Perl scrips that generate the website. It is highly automated but you need to have some programming knowledge in order to make changes to it.
.

Opinions expressed here are my own, and not necessarily those of the CCRL Group.

Dann Corbit
Posts: 11160
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 7:57 pm
Location: Redmond, WA USA
Contact:

Re: Suggestion to CCRL

Post by Dann Corbit » Sun Mar 15, 2020 4:19 pm

The problem is that you have to change not only the engine names for the engines, but also the engine names in every single file for every version of the engine that ever existed for every single file.
Otherwise, the Elo calculations will not work.

That is a really big job.

Consider not only all the different time levels, but they also have split-outs for every individual single engine.

And none of us are really confused by it. It would just look a little better.
Taking ideas is not a vice, it is a virtue. We have another word for this. It is called learning.
But sharing ideas is an even greater virtue. We have another word for this. It is called teaching.

Modern Times
Posts: 2554
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:02 pm

Re: Suggestion to CCRL

Post by Modern Times » Sun Mar 15, 2020 4:55 pm

It is a really big job, yes. And for no real benefit.

The source pgns can remain unchanged. The re-naming can be handled in the master engine config file and the mapping file that goes with it, but they are very big files. I'd probably ask a programmer experienced in text manipulation to write a small one-off program for us to flip things around, or perhaps a decent text file editor can do it with some sort of search and replace. Anyway I'd try it manually on the chess960 list first as that is quite small. There is still the issue of the custom lists to investigate though.
.

Opinions expressed here are my own, and not necessarily those of the CCRL Group.

Modern Times
Posts: 2554
Joined: Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:02 pm

Re: Suggestion to CCRL

Post by Modern Times » Sun Mar 15, 2020 7:19 pm

From a quick look at the code, I believe that we could change to "x64" instead of "64-bit" without any difficulty at all. That is a bit cleaner. Might be something we could do in the interim, worth thinking about also.
.

Opinions expressed here are my own, and not necessarily those of the CCRL Group.

User avatar
mvanthoor
Posts: 236
Joined: Wed Jul 03, 2019 2:42 pm
Full name: Marcel Vanthoor

Re: Suggestion to CCRL

Post by mvanthoor » Sun Mar 15, 2020 9:45 pm

This would be a hack, but here goes.

It seems engine that are 64-bit have "64-bit" in their name, the ones that are 32-bit have either nothing, or 32-bit.

Leave everything as it is.
Then add a Javascript procedure to the top of each page, which would add "32-bit" to any engine that doesn't already have that marking, and then remove "64-bit" from all the engines that are marked 64-bit.

It would basically be a cosmetic fix in the front-end, but you wouldn't have to change anything in the backend of the site.

AndrewGrant
Posts: 583
Joined: Tue Apr 19, 2016 4:08 am
Location: U.S.A
Full name: Andrew Grant
Contact:

Re: Suggestion to CCRL

Post by AndrewGrant » Sun Mar 15, 2020 10:59 pm

mvanthoor wrote:
Sun Mar 15, 2020 9:45 pm
This would be a hack, but here goes.

It seems engine that are 64-bit have "64-bit" in their name, the ones that are 32-bit have either nothing, or 32-bit.

Leave everything as it is.
Then add a Javascript procedure to the top of each page, which would add "32-bit" to any engine that doesn't already have that marking, and then remove "64-bit" from all the engines that are marked 64-bit.

It would basically be a cosmetic fix in the front-end, but you wouldn't have to change anything in the backend of the site.
+1

the_real_greco
Posts: 35
Joined: Thu Sep 19, 2019 3:55 am
Full name: Andy Erly

Re: Suggestion to CCRL

Post by the_real_greco » Mon Mar 16, 2020 1:49 am

This is only tangentially related, but often I refer people to the CCRL (or any other rating list) before they can submit an engine to the CCC. Is there an easy way to apply for inclusion?

I seriously doubt anyone's going to follow through (or that anything submitted that way will be particularly unique), but it would be nice to have some information to give people.

(Also, it turns out that I use the same sentence structure (the one with the parenthetical) over and over.)

Post Reply