[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [XBoard-devel] Future plans

From: h.g. muller
Subject: Re: [XBoard-devel] Future plans
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 2009 12:12:11 +0200

Specifying an engine name would be equivalent to specifying a save file in your proposal. I preferred specifying an engine name since it is completely generic. It has a meaning for all types
of engines and people are familiar with the concept.

But if you want to specify a (polyglot specific) save file on the command line then fine.

I am not sure I understand what you mean here. Are you referring to the Polyglot command line
or the WinBoard command line?

In any the case it seems to me the template should then contain a provision to include the name of the
savefile, e.g. -sf <SaveFile>  (instead of -en <EngineName>)

I assume you do not want to force the user to start WB and go to some dialog to select a new SaveFile each time. Specifying it on the command line is faster and less confusing.

What I had in mind was that people could start a UCI engine by specifying the executable in the normal way with -fcp and -fd, only adding the -fUCI flag to tell WB an adapter should be invoked. This can obviously only work if there is only one version of that engine, because it would use the default settings file for that engine. This could contain customized settings or not. In the latter
case it would not even have to pre-exist.

In the (less usual) case that people want to experiment with multiple settings, they cannot use this simple -fUCI mechanism, they would somehow have to identify which settings file is to be used. In the pre-4.4 era, people did this by running with -fcp "polyglot mypolyglot.ini".
That seems simple enough, and is actually hard to beat. So why change it?

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]