phhnguyen wrote: ↑
Thu Oct 24, 2019 10:09 pm
What do you mean "look the same"?
That it must not matter which engine the GUI loads, it must look the same. That some parameters like hashfull are optional in UCI is a completely different story from sending tabular data and as you suggested even with colour formatting, arrows and whatnot.
ou are talking on a topic about reporting WDL stats that older engines don't have.
That's no reason to start putting the engine in control of how the UI looks like, and especially not with UCI where the GUI is in control, not the engine. Adding WDL is of course fine, but absolutely no argument for sending tabular data with coloured arrows and such nonsense.
Frankly speaking, I get bored if all engines-GUIs are looked totally the same both inside and outside from ones of the 1990s.
Then make a completely different GUI. But as I already pointed out, consistency is an important part of usability, and that you are bored is no reason to suddenly put the engine in control so that the data display suddenly looks completely different with each engine. Users do NOT want this.
Why not? Any wrong?
Because it's obviously awful software design, that's why. MVC anyone? Decades of established software design practice? Layered architecture? Why do we even have the engine/GUI separation instead of as in the 90s where GUIs and egines were usually a single program?
It's like building a car where the tyre manufacturer comes up with the idea that the tyres should do the route planning.