ChessUSA.com TalkChess.com
Hosted by Your Move Chess & Games
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal
Post new topic    TalkChess.com Forum Index -> Computer Chess Club: Programming and Technical Discussions Flat
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Miguel A. Ballicora



Joined: 09 Mar 2006
Posts: 4427
Location: Chicago, Illinois, USA
PostPost subject: Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal    Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:01 pm Reply to topic Reply with quote
hgm wrote:
Well, if it is also useful to have the opposite, then I would definitely prefer include/exclude over kille/unkill. So leave it as it is. Currently WinBoard does not implement this at all, and I will adapt to Gaviota. I only have implemented it in Polyglot as a "sleeper feature", using "kill". But then I will change that there to "exclude" (abandoning the fine tradition of WB protocol to have silly command names... Wink ), and implement the "include" as well.

Currently I only tested the UCI searchmoves implementation in Polyglot using the synonym of the "exclude" command appearing as an engine-defined option in the Engine-Settings dialog. (It seemed to work with Glaurung: after 1. e4 f5 Glaurung likes 2.exf5, and typing e4f5 for the option made Glaurung switch to e5, and then typing e4e5 made it change to Nc3.)

A problem is still how to implement this in a game-state-unaware adapter like UCI2WB. I guess I will have to make it collect the move list from the engine's currmove commands. A rule-unaware GUI could then request it from the adapter. This has the advantage anyway that it could present the moves in engine-order, so that the most relevant moves presumably are near the top of any presented table. I am thinking of using the WB "bk" command for this, requiring an engine to send all legal moves from the current position when it receives it in analysis mode.

As to the "chat" stuff: I am not too keen on giving the engine a say in GUI matters. It should be the user's choice if he prefers to see white or black at the bottom, wants to see the PV as SAN or long-algebraic, or wants to see engine tells as popups or a chat (or not at all). The engine's task should be limited to providing content.

I know that XBoard has an option auto-comment, but I think this is not used outside ICS mode. It would be nice to also give it a meaning in engine mode, so that engine utterances could be incorporated in the PGN.


After opening gaviota and typing in the terminal

Code:
help exclude

exclude <move1> <move2> etc.
exclude none
All the different moves will be excluded from analysis
all will be analyzed with the parameter 'none'
moves are in format e2e4, c7c8q etc.
see "include"

help include

include <move1> <move2> etc.
include all
All the different moves will be the only ones considered in analysis
all will be analyzed with the parameter 'all'
moves are in format e2e4, c7c8q etc.
see "exclude"


I think you have everything you need to test this. With inbetween you can force gaviota to send feature exclude=1, and replace "exclude" with 'kill", if you want. I can make this modifications in a breeze, but you can use it right away as it is now.

It is exactly the model Ferdinand suggested.

Miguel
_________________
http://sites.google.com/site/gaviotachessengine/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Display posts from previous:   
Subject Author Date/Time
WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:52 am
      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Julien MARCEL Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:18 pm
            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Mar 12, 2012 12:59 pm
                  Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:42 pm
            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Ferdinand Mosca Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:34 pm
      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Daniel Shawul Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:12 pm
            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:21 pm
                  Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Karlo Bala Jr. Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:56 pm
                        Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Mar 12, 2012 10:11 pm
      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Ferdinand Mosca Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:46 pm
      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:48 pm
            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Mar 12, 2012 3:51 pm
                  Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Mon Mar 12, 2012 8:01 pm
      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Evert Glebbeek Tue Mar 13, 2012 5:28 am
            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Tue Mar 13, 2012 10:05 am
                  Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Tue Mar 13, 2012 4:39 pm
                        Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Tue Mar 13, 2012 5:24 pm
                              Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Piero Teixeira Tue Mar 13, 2012 11:23 pm
                                    Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:16 am
                              Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:46 am
                                    Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:47 am
                                          Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Michel Van den Bergh Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:16 pm
                                                Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:55 pm
                                                Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Wed Mar 14, 2012 4:17 pm
                                                      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Michel Van den Bergh Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:30 pm
                                                            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:42 pm
                                                                  Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Michel Van den Bergh Wed Mar 14, 2012 6:30 pm
                                                                        Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:27 pm
                                                                              Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Michel Van den Bergh Wed Mar 14, 2012 7:35 pm
                                                                                    Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Dadi Jonsson Thu Mar 15, 2012 10:01 am
                                          Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Miguel A. Ballicora Wed Mar 14, 2012 3:52 pm
      Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Ferdinand Mosca Sun Apr 01, 2012 6:41 am
            Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Sun Apr 01, 2012 9:10 am
                  Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Apr 02, 2012 10:02 am
                        Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Ferdinand Mosca Mon Apr 02, 2012 11:04 am
                              Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal H.G.Muller Mon Apr 02, 2012 3:18 pm
                                    Re: WB protocol (and UCI?) extension proposal Ferdinand Mosca Tue Apr 03, 2012 11:13 am
Post new topic    TalkChess.com Forum Index -> Computer Chess Club: Programming and Technical Discussions

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
Enhanced with Moby Threads