Winboard + Fritz 6

[Joshua Coleman]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Joshua Coleman at 15 April 2000 21:59:34:
What would it cost to get Fritz 6, Deep Junior, or HIARCS 7.32 running
through Winboard?
I mean, hiring a professional to code the interface.
Or, how much would it cost to be able to write a program to auto play (no human control) Fritz on ICC?

[Pete Galati]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Pete Galati at 15 April 2000 22:45:15:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Winboard + Fritz 6 geschrieben von: / posted by: Joshua Coleman at 15 April 2000 21:59:34:

What would it cost to get Fritz 6, Deep Junior, or HIARCS 7.32 running
through Winboard?
I mean, hiring a professional to code the interface.
Or, how much would it cost to be able to write a program to auto play (no human control) Fritz on ICC?

I don't think that cost is the issue.
1. It'll never happen without Chessbase doing the work themself, and
2. There's no practical reason for doing it, the interfaces with those 3 programs can all run Winboard engines in them.
Pete

[Volker Pittlik]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Volker Pittlik at 15 April 2000 22:57:59:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Winboard + Fritz 6 geschrieben von: / posted by: Pete Galati at 15 April 2000 22:45:15:

What would it cost to get Fritz 6, Deep Junior, or HIARCS 7.32 running
through Winboard?
I mean, hiring a professional to code the interface.
Or, how much would it cost to be able to write a program to auto play (no human control) Fritz on ICC?

I don't think that cost is the issue.
1. It'll never happen without Chessbase doing the work themself, and
2. There's no practical reason for doing it, the interfaces with those 3 programs can all run Winboard engines in them.
Pete

As far as I know the winboard engines don't run absolutely perfect in the Chessbase GUIs. I guess for a professionel this jobs wouldn't take not more than 1 or 2 days.
Volker

[Pete Galati]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Pete Galati at 16 April 2000 00:25:46:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Winboard + Fritz 6 geschrieben von: / posted by: Volker Pittlik at 15 April 2000 22:57:59:

What would it cost to get Fritz 6, Deep Junior, or HIARCS 7.32 running
through Winboard?

I don't think that cost is the issue.
1. It'll never happen without Chessbase doing the work themself, and
2. There's no practical reason for doing it, the interfaces with those 3 programs can all run Winboard engines in them.

As far as I know the winboard engines don't run absolutely perfect in the Chessbase GUIs. I guess for a professionel this jobs wouldn't take not more than 1 or 2 days.
Volker

I've never heard that it's difficult addopting Winboard engines to run in Chessbase if you know how to do it, the problem would be in getting a Chessbase engine to run in Winboard. You'd need the source code, and you'd need to addopt it to use Winboard protocal, because what Chessbase is doing is addopting the Winboard protocal to communicate with the Chessbase protocal.
I've never heard of that having been done before so we could assume that it's more than 1 or 2 days work. Have you heard of anyone who's done the work?
Pete

[U.Türke]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: U.Türke at 16 April 2000 13:17:10:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Winboard + Fritz 6 geschrieben von: / posted by: Pete Galati at 16 April 2000 00:25:46:

What would it cost to get Fritz 6, Deep Junior, or HIARCS 7.32 running
through Winboard?

I don't think that cost is the issue.
1. It'll never happen without Chessbase doing the work themself, and
2. There's no practical reason for doing it, the interfaces with those 3 programs can all run Winboard engines in them.

As far as I know the winboard engines don't run absolutely perfect in the Chessbase GUIs. I guess for a professionel this jobs wouldn't take not more than 1 or 2 days.
Volker

I've never heard that it's difficult addopting Winboard engines to run in Chessbase if you know how to do it, the problem would be in getting a Chessbase engine to run in Winboard. You'd need the source code, and you'd need to addopt it to use Winboard protocal, because what Chessbase is doing is addopting the Winboard protocal to communicate with the Chessbase protocal.
I've never heard of that having been done before so we could assume that it's more than 1 or 2 days work. Have you heard of anyone who's done the work?
Pete

I could imagine that there is also a way to run them "under winboard" without code modification of the cb-engines. One could consider to use the fritz auto232 interface. So, we already have Remi's auto232 for winboard engines. I think that there should be a way to modify Remi's source, in order to send the moves from the cb-engine to the winboard gui itself (instead of sending directly to the engine) and vice versa.
Remember that auto232/Win32 can also be used locally (e.g. connecting COM1 and COM2 on the same machine).
A close look to Remi's code could tell us. Fortunately, Remi is releasing his source code. But perhaps it's a bit complicated !
What do you think ß
Uli

[Pete Galati]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Pete Galati at 17 April 2000 01:34:51:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Winboard + Fritz 6 geschrieben von: / posted by: U.Türke at 16 April 2000 13:17:10:

What would it cost to get Fritz 6, Deep Junior, or HIARCS 7.32 running
through Winboard?

I don't think that cost is the issue.
1. It'll never happen without Chessbase doing the work themself, and
2. There's no practical reason for doing it, the interfaces with those 3 programs can all run Winboard engines in them.

As far as I know the winboard engines don't run absolutely perfect in the Chessbase GUIs. I guess for a professionel this jobs wouldn't take not more than 1 or 2 days.
Volker

I've never heard that it's difficult addopting Winboard engines to run in Chessbase if you know how to do it, the problem would be in getting a Chessbase engine to run in Winboard. You'd need the source code, and you'd need to addopt it to use Winboard protocal, because what Chessbase is doing is addopting the Winboard protocal to communicate with the Chessbase protocal.
I've never heard of that having been done before so we could assume that it's more than 1 or 2 days work. Have you heard of anyone who's done the work?
Pete

I could imagine that there is also a way to run them "under winboard" without code modification of the cb-engines. One could consider to use the fritz auto232 interface. So, we already have Remi's auto232 for winboard engines. I think that there should be a way to modify Remi's source, in order to send the moves from the cb-engine to the winboard gui itself (instead of sending directly to the engine) and vice versa.
Remember that auto232/Win32 can also be used locally (e.g. connecting COM1 and COM2 on the same machine).
A close look to Remi's code could tell us. Fortunately, Remi is releasing his source code. But perhaps it's a bit complicated !
What do you think ß
Uli

I don't have the knowledge to be able to do that myself, but it's probably allot more posible than hacking a Chessbase engine to work with Winboard, and more useful because you could then use the auto232 addopter with _any_ Chessbase engine (if 32 bit). And I think that Remi's utility modified to use Chessbase engines would use less of your computer's resources that running the Chessbase engines through the auto232 that's built into the Chessbase interfaces, because like all big Windows programs, they use a large amount of memory to make them run.
Oddly enough, on my computer, I have drivers for both COM1 and COM2, but I only have the 1 serial port. I've never looked into the amount of work involved in installing a second serial port. I probably have imformation about that somewhere, but I'm not sure.
Pete

[Franz]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Franz at 18 April 2000 14:21:58:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Winboard + Fritz 6 geschrieben von: / posted by: U.Türke at 16 April 2000 13:17:10:

I could imagine that there is also a way to run them "under winboard"
without code modification of the cb-engines. One could consider to use the
fritz auto232 interface. So, we already have Remi's auto232 for winboard
engines. I think that there should be a way to modify Remi's source, in order
to send the moves from the cb-engine to the winboard gui itself (instead of
sending directly to the engine) and vice versa.
Remember that auto232/Win32 can also be used locally (e.g. connecting COM1
and COM2 on the same machine).

I don't see the point of this: why do you want it to run in winboard this way? You would still have the "possible bugs" due to the auto 232 interface so why not run the winboard engine stright against fritz?
(I've done this using the two COMs of my pc to test CraftyWB against the Crafty in its incarnation made by CB saff.)
With you modification one would not gain "more" contro of the remote (fritz) engine.
What would be nice to have is little a interface layer to connect a CB compatible engine-dlls to winboard, this would not need a hack rather to know the name and the prototypes of the functions to call. Off course CB staff don't want to release this information because after that people could give away copies of the engines to be used under winboard were they don't have any control of the installed engines.
regards
Franz

[U.Türke]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: U.Türke at 18 April 2000 17:44:41:
Als Antwort auf: / As an answer to: Re: Winboard + Fritz 6 geschrieben von: / posted by: Franz at 18 April 2000 14:21:58:

I could imagine that there is also a way to run them "under winboard"
without code modification of the cb-engines. One could consider to use the
fritz auto232 interface. So, we already have Remi's auto232 for winboard
engines. I think that there should be a way to modify Remi's source, in order
to send the moves from the cb-engine to the winboard gui itself (instead of
sending directly to the engine) and vice versa.
Remember that auto232/Win32 can also be used locally (e.g. connecting COM1
and COM2 on the same machine).

I don't see the point of this: why do you want it to run in winboard this way? You would still have the "possible bugs" due to the auto 232 interface so why not run the winboard engine stright against fritz?
(I've done this using the two COMs of my pc to test CraftyWB against the Crafty in its incarnation made by CB saff.)
With you modification one would not gain "more" contro of the remote (fritz) engine.
What would be nice to have is little a interface layer to connect a CB compatible engine-dlls to winboard, this would not need a hack rather to know the name and the prototypes of the functions to call. Off course CB staff don't want to release this information because after that people could give away copies of the engines to be used under winboard were they don't have any control of the installed engines.
regards
Franz

e.g. to have the cb engines available for automated play on the internet chess servers ...
Uli