There is something worse: software that crashes. An engine should reject what it cannot handle, but not more than that. For instance, if an engine has a data structure that admits up to 16 pieces per side and no more, it should reject positions with 17 pieces, otherwise, it will sooner or later crash. On the other hand, there is no reason to reject a position based on a clever retrograde analysis. Most likely, the internal data structures could handle that position. I agree with you in the latter case. However, in many cases, it is not pedantry, it is an acknowledgment of the limitations.hgm wrote:'Annoying' would describe it better than 'clever'! If it really refuses it for this reason, it is just needlessly restricting its usefulness to the user. Nothing worse than pedantic software...
Miguel