Check it and you will see what I mean about some of these freewares. It is not up to me to run around downloading extra files off the internet so I can make a "maybe 2300" engine work on my system. Speaking of some java platform. He obviously doesn't know me- because if I need it- he best put it in the zip to extract. - All this from the "read me" file. He says it is a UCI engine, and the hash by default is set to 128MB. And if I want to change it, just make the change in the ini or bat file. And this statement tells me to start with he has never even seen a chessbase gui. Let someone make the change he speaks of and see how impressed Fritz 11 or Fritz 13 gui is.
Obviously it is NOT in any of the mega-freeware divisions I am running. 1.Make it easy to load- which means don't send the user running around downloading files off the internet. 2.Make it stable- can't know that till you can load it. 3.First learn how it works in the UCI interfaces before explaining how to use it. And find out that chessbase guis don't even acknowledge changes made in a UCI engine folder. (the only change it will recognize is how you name a logo) There are a couple exceptions- as with anything. But his aint one of them.
This is a perfect example of a freeware that gets left behind in my tournaments. I am not being ugly- just honest. I am sure he is probably a very nice person. Only problem- "nice" doesn't install engines.
I am heading to sleep a bit and let the games run.
george
Check Latest Bagatur Version!
Moderator: Ras
-
hgm
- Posts: 28433
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
Re: Check Latest Bagatur Version!
First let me say I completely agree with your tough stance on engine compliance. Pampering non-compliant engines will just perpetuate abuse.
However, I think you have this one wrong. The purpose of setting another hash size is not to impress a GUI. As long as the engine does as the ini file it reads says it must do, (namely use such and such a hash size) the GUI won't even be aware of what is going on.geots wrote:And this statement tells me to start with he has never even seen a chessbase gui. Let someone make the change he speaks of and see how impressed Fritz 11 or Fritz 13 gui is.
-
geots
- Posts: 4790
- Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 12:42 am
Re: Check Latest Bagatur Version!
hgm wrote:First let me say I completely agree with your tough stance on engine compliance. Pampering non-compliant engines will just perpetuate abuse.
However, I think you have this one wrong. The purpose of setting another hash size is not to impress a GUI. As long as the engine does as the ini file it reads says it must do, (namely use such and such a hash size) the GUI won't even be aware of what is going on.geots wrote:And this statement tells me to start with he has never even seen a chessbase gui. Let someone make the change he speaks of and see how impressed Fritz 11 or Fritz 13 gui is.
What I am saying is that changing the hash in the ini file in the engine folder will not change the hash for the engine as it plays in the chessbase gui- as he seems to think it will. Which means there is no way his hash can be changed in a chessbase gui. Which is not good at all. It can read 128 in the ini file- he can change it- but the change will not show up in the gui. It will show up only if the engine is winboard run as Uci with the adapters.
gts
-
geots
- Posts: 4790
- Joined: Sat Mar 11, 2006 12:42 am
Re: Check Latest Bagatur Version!
HG, let me tell you here I have always had great respect for your abilities. And you are like me in the sense that if it "is what it is" you don't beat around the bush- you say what needs to be said.
Having said that- I did forget to add one important thing. Whether Winboard or UCI, parameter changes inside the gui will generally be recognized by the chessbase gui. Of course there are always exceptions. Let me be sure here I state it correctly: The Bagatur author thinks that making changes in his ini file will show up as changes in the gui- and that is just not true.
Best,
george
Having said that- I did forget to add one important thing. Whether Winboard or UCI, parameter changes inside the gui will generally be recognized by the chessbase gui. Of course there are always exceptions. Let me be sure here I state it correctly: The Bagatur author thinks that making changes in his ini file will show up as changes in the gui- and that is just not true.
Best,
george
-
velmarin
- Posts: 1600
- Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 9:48 am
Re: Check Latest Bagatur Version!
George,
Engine can read the INI file independent of the GUI.
Engine may not have the "UCI_Option" "Hash" and therefore not put any hash.
A programmer can put in the engine options that do nothing,
and leave the parameter box, and do nothing.
If the programmer has the engine code to find him. "file.Ini" and read it, engine read it and was configured with what that says "file.Ini".
Even the programmer can call instead of "hash" any other name, then the "GUI" will not recognize it, but the "Engine" yes.
I hope I knew me explain.
Engine can read the INI file independent of the GUI.
Engine may not have the "UCI_Option" "Hash" and therefore not put any hash.
A programmer can put in the engine options that do nothing,
and leave the parameter box, and do nothing.
If the programmer has the engine code to find him. "file.Ini" and read it, engine read it and was configured with what that says "file.Ini".
Even the programmer can call instead of "hash" any other name, then the "GUI" will not recognize it, but the "Engine" yes.
I hope I knew me explain.
-
hgm
- Posts: 28433
- Joined: Fri Mar 10, 2006 10:06 am
- Location: Amsterdam
- Full name: H G Muller
Re: Check Latest Bagatur Version!
It is as Jose says: the engine reads the ini file in its folder directly, and obeys the instructions in it. The GUI cannot, and need not know anything about it. That holds for any GUI, not just for ChessBase. WinBoard also has no clue about what goes on between the engine and its ini files. It does not even know the ini files exist, or where the engine hides them.
So what happens is that the engine will just use the hash size that was specified in its ini file, (say 64MB), but the GUI will be totally unaware of this, and report to the user in its dialogs that the hash is perhaps 128MB, or let the user change it to 256MB without complaint, because it cannot know that the engine is ignoring the commands the GUI sends it, and stubbornly sticks to its 64MB. You can no longer trust what the GUI says, because the GUI is fooled and disobeyed by the engine.
This is why it is lamentable that authors do such things.
So what happens is that the engine will just use the hash size that was specified in its ini file, (say 64MB), but the GUI will be totally unaware of this, and report to the user in its dialogs that the hash is perhaps 128MB, or let the user change it to 256MB without complaint, because it cannot know that the engine is ignoring the commands the GUI sends it, and stubbornly sticks to its 64MB. You can no longer trust what the GUI says, because the GUI is fooled and disobeyed by the engine.
This is why it is lamentable that authors do such things.