I am thinking to removing PolyGlot.ini file
As far as you know, what GUI would be broken by this change ?
Why we still need polyglot.ini ?
Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw
-
- Posts: 1334
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 11:14 am
Re: Why we still need polyglot.ini ?
I believe eboard is still CECP only. It's webpage looks that way.mcostalba wrote:I am thinking to removing PolyGlot.ini file
As far as you know, what GUI would be broken by this change ?
Matthew:out
Some believe in the almighty dollar.
I believe in the almighty printf statement.
I believe in the almighty printf statement.
-
- Posts: 2684
- Joined: Sat Jun 14, 2008 9:17 pm
Re: Why we still need polyglot.ini ?
I checked the site:ZirconiumX wrote: I believe eboard is still CECP only. It's webpage looks that way.
The latest version is: 1.1.1 (Feb 22nd, 2008)
For me it means it is unmantained, so I am going to remove the poliglot file.
-
- Posts: 27809
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
Re: Why we still need polyglot.ini ?
Strange reasoning. If it was maintained, it could add UCI support. When it isn't, its users will surely remain dependenton polyglot.
-
- Posts: 1334
- Joined: Sun Jul 17, 2011 11:14 am
Re: Why we still need polyglot.ini ?
hgm wrote:Strange reasoning. If it was maintained, it could add UCI support. When it isn't, its users will surely remain dependenton polyglot.
Code: Select all
polyglot -noini -ec ./stockfish -ed .
Matthew:out
Some believe in the almighty dollar.
I believe in the almighty printf statement.
I believe in the almighty printf statement.
-
- Posts: 3232
- Joined: Mon May 31, 2010 1:29 pm
- Full name: lucasart
Re: Why we still need polyglot.ini ?
I don't understand your point. What do you mean by "add UCI support" ? Stockfish and all modern GUI support UCI. I don't see how polyglot.ini helps here.hgm wrote:Strange reasoning. If it was maintained, it could add UCI support. When it isn't, its users will surely remain dependenton polyglot.
Do you mean to say that it allows to use Stockfish in legacy CECP only capable GUI ? Like Xboard ? Even here your argument makes no sense. I don't see how a CECP only GUI could run Stockfish without polyglot, but with only a polyglot.ini file.
Theory and practice sometimes clash. And when that happens, theory loses. Every single time.
-
- Posts: 27809
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
Re: Why we still need polyglot.ini ?
We were specifically talking about eboard.
I think Polyglot can be found in almost all standard repositories. Linux users that are not computer savvy might not know how to use it for running Stockfish, however. Unfortunately the Linux install process of packages for engines is not such that it automatically configures installed GUIs to use those engines. Users that are not computer savvy might have problems running Stockfish as WB engine, although in principle this is extremely simple as one of the posters pointed out. But only when you know it.
Some UCI engines include polyglot.ini files as a service to their users, to make life simpler for their users that want to run them on CECP-only GUIs. Whether that is a good idea or not depends a lot on whether you want to please users, or whether you release the engine just to please GUI developers.
I think Polyglot can be found in almost all standard repositories. Linux users that are not computer savvy might not know how to use it for running Stockfish, however. Unfortunately the Linux install process of packages for engines is not such that it automatically configures installed GUIs to use those engines. Users that are not computer savvy might have problems running Stockfish as WB engine, although in principle this is extremely simple as one of the posters pointed out. But only when you know it.
Some UCI engines include polyglot.ini files as a service to their users, to make life simpler for their users that want to run them on CECP-only GUIs. Whether that is a good idea or not depends a lot on whether you want to please users, or whether you release the engine just to please GUI developers.
-
- Posts: 1763
- Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 1:49 pm
- Location: Edmonton, Alberta, Canada
- Full name: Peter Skinner
Re: Why we still need polyglot.ini ?
I use Polyglot with Winboard to run engines.
Rarely do I use anything else. When I do it's the Hiarcs interface.
I haven't touched Arena since my run in with that team several years ago. It could possibly be the best, most advanced interface on the planet, but I'd never use it again.
Even now, if you state anything that even resembles negative feedback, their "team" lynch you.
Peter
Rarely do I use anything else. When I do it's the Hiarcs interface.
I haven't touched Arena since my run in with that team several years ago. It could possibly be the best, most advanced interface on the planet, but I'd never use it again.
Even now, if you state anything that even resembles negative feedback, their "team" lynch you.
Peter
I was kicked out of Chapters because I moved all the Bibles to the fiction section.