hgm wrote:Unfortunately moderator policy makes this forum unsuitable for extended point-by-point answer of your posts. If you want them answered, post the same questions in the WinBoard forum, and I promise a detailed answer.
If you answer the question in a civil manner, I do not believe they will object. The questions are real, because they have actually already been an issue and it took some significant efforts by ICC to address them because they did not want to have multiple versions of their programmer's protocol to deal with, something winboard/xboard has been quite able to handle as a result of Tim's efforts.
We simply need a correct fix for this issue, once and for all, to make the problem go away permanently. At present there are timing holes any time you have two commands that are intended to apply simultaneously...
bob wrote:
No, he is proposing that the GUI follow the formal FIDE rules of chess. Ever seen a real game with an illegal move played? The person doing that does _not_ lose. In fact, the rules of chess cover this specifically. If the move played is illegal, it must be retracted but that piece must be moved to another square, unless any move of that piece is illegal. There are rules to follow, not rules to make up. While it is unlikely that a program could recover from the above, there is absolutely nothing that says that _some_ program could not, and making a legal scenario impossible doesn't seem to be particularly reasonable.
Just follow the rule book. no more, no less, and this could work. But stop trying to define your own rules and using justifications like "nobody wants to wait 40 minutes..." When I run my big matches, I don't watch all 20,000 games, I don't care if one takes longer than usual because an engine hangs in the search or plays an illegal move or just quits moving for unexplained reasons. The official rules determine the outcome...
Is there any need to continue this idiocy?
Is there anyone, besides Bob, who uses a GUI for engine-engine tournaments, and feels the need for giving engines that make illegal moves a 'second chance'????
I personally believe you want to be obtuse, just for the sake of arguing. Do you _honestly_ believe that a GUI is just a thing that connects two chess engines, and is not used in any other way? What do you think the U in GUI stands for??? One of the two (or both or neither) combatants could quite naturally be a human.
So I don't get why you are trying to be obstinate and only talk about computer-computer games, when there are other issues for humans that also need to be taken into consideration if the GUI is going to be useful.
Do you actually believe that more people use winboard/xboard to carry out these silly basement tournaments, as opposed to those that use winboard/xboard as a GUI to actually _play_ chess, either on a server or against a program? Think about it for a minute, then perhaps you can stop with the stupid rhetorical questions that mean zero in a real context...
I do not see any need to alter the behavior of WinBoard in Human-engine, Human-ICS and engine-ICS (Zippy) mode. If an ICS is involved the ICS controls the score sheet and will do whatever it wants. If a Human is involved he will know when the engine makes a false call, and when it is crashed and should be killed. The /testClaim and various adjudication options are only useful in engine-engine games, and, indeed, are only selectable in two-machines mode.
That you have no interest in playing engine-engine games, while others have, is all the more reason to ignore what you have to say on the subject. I don't expect someone who refers to himself as "we all" to understand this, though.
hgm wrote:I do not see any need to alter the behavior of WinBoard in Human-engine, Human-ICS and engine-ICS (Zippy) mode. If an ICS is involved the ICS controls the score sheet and will do whatever it wants. If a Human is involved he will know when the engine makes a false call, and when it is crashed and should be killed. The /testClaim and various adjudication options are only useful in engine-engine games, and, indeed, are only selectable in two-machines mode.
That you have no interest in playing engine-engine games, while others have, is all the more reason to ignore what you have to say on the subject. I don't expect someone who refers to himself as "we all" to understand this, though.
Augmenting your argument with personal insults is yet another indication (and tacit admission) of its inadequacy in your own eyes.
hgm wrote:I do not see any need to alter the behavior of WinBoard in Human-engine, Human-ICS and engine-ICS (Zippy) mode. If an ICS is involved the ICS controls the score sheet and will do whatever it wants. If a Human is involved he will know when the engine makes a false call, and when it is crashed and should be killed. The /testClaim and various adjudication options are only useful in engine-engine games, and, indeed, are only selectable in two-machines mode.
That you have no interest in playing engine-engine games, while others have, is all the more reason to ignore what you have to say on the subject. I don't expect someone who refers to himself as "we all" to understand this, though.
I reallly don't expect you to understand very much anyway, since you only think inside the small box that surrounds whatever you are currently doing. There is a bigger picture. Some of us see it, that's good enough I guess...
hgm wrote:What a coincidence. That is exactly how we all feel about you...
"....me, myself and I."
I do not talk about other so I will not use the word "we" but I also share the same opinion as H.G.Muller about the way I would like to use the interface(engine-engine games and not engine-human games)
