[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Gnushogi-devel] Comparing GNUShogi 1.2 and later versions
From: |
H.G. Muller |
Subject: |
Re: [Gnushogi-devel] Comparing GNUShogi 1.2 and later versions |
Date: |
Mon, 19 Feb 2018 14:42:50 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.6.0 |
Op 2/18/2018 om 4:04 PM schreef address@hidden:
For this my Omaha UI could be of use, as it's able to talk both protocols,
but i've not worked on it for some time now, and it's still unable to
handle clocks, which makes it of limited use at best. Maybe I should have
a look at this, it was what I last worked on on this software, I just
remember it was not finished...
The obvious other idea would be to backport your XBoard patches, but then
this work would be of limited use aside from checking the AI sanity,
so I'm less inclined to go this path :}
Hmm, neither option sounds very attractive. (Unless the inteface code
was changed so
little between v1.2 and v2.3 that the patch applies without protest.)
Making the UI
manage clocks is of course worth it, but it will be a lot of work.
I don't exactly remember how XBoard and xShogi protocol differed.
Obviously in move
notation and swapping of the black and white commands, and otim ->
otime. And
probably the setting of time control might be different. Perhaps it is
possible to adapt
UCI2WB to become an XS2WB adapter with very little work. It already
parses all CECP
commands though a sequece of string compares, and I can just delete the
handling of
all commands that don't need modification, and pass unrecognized commands
unchanged to the engine. Routines to convert move notation are already
in there (for USI).
The routine Engine2GUI would have to be completely rewritten to parse
xShogi protocol
engine->GUI commands, but there are only very few of those. (Basically
just moves
and thinking output, and we don't care about the thinking output.)
Of course this would still be a 'dead-end project', but it might be (by
far) the simplest
of all options. And it would work for all GNU Shogi versions.
Great news, I guess I can find a slot for such a small task :)
Thanks!
As to CrazyWa: I hope you haven't spent any time on this yet, as I just
discovered that
Tori Shogi was broken (already in the version I started the cleanup
from). At some point
I insertd an alias variant name for washogi (11x17+16_chu), but I had
not shifted the
corresponding data in tables indexed by the variant number, so that the
Wa alias was
using the Tori values, and Tori Shogi was using null data. I discovered
this when I tried
to add yet another variant (Euro-Shogi), which CrazyWa already claims it
can play.
I pushed the Tori/Wa fix to my on-line repository, but perhaps I should
add euro-Shogi
tables as well, so that it indeed plays this. So give me oe more week to
see if this is as
easy as I think it should be.
Regads,
H.G.
- [Gnushogi-devel] Comparing GNUShogi 1.2 and later versions, ydirson, 2018/02/11
- Re: [Gnushogi-devel] Comparing GNUShogi 1.2 and later versions, H.G. Muller, 2018/02/18
- Re: [Gnushogi-devel] Comparing GNUShogi 1.2 and later versions, ydirson, 2018/02/18
- Re: [Gnushogi-devel] Comparing GNUShogi 1.2 and later versions,
H.G. Muller <=
- Re: [Gnushogi-devel] Comparing GNUShogi 1.2 and later versions, h . g . muller, 2018/02/19
- Re: [Gnushogi-devel] Comparing GNUShogi 1.2 and later versions, ydirson, 2018/02/19
- Re: [Gnushogi-devel] Comparing GNUShogi 1.2 and later versions, h . g . muller, 2018/02/20
- Re: [Gnushogi-devel] Comparing GNUShogi 1.2 and later versions, h . g . muller, 2018/02/20
- Re: [Gnushogi-devel] Comparing GNUShogi 1.2 and later versions, Justin Vreeland, 2018/02/20
- Re: [Gnushogi-devel] Comparing GNUShogi 1.2 and later versions, h . g . muller, 2018/02/21