RE: [computer-go] GTP and Tourney in SmartGo 1.4

[Arend Bayer <arend.bayer@xxxxxx>]

Hi Mark,

On Tue, 16 Mar 2004, Mark Boon wrote:
> I do agree, as I already wrote, that XML tends to get a bit too verbose. One
> has to be careful to make a good definition to remain both readable and
> compact. And linking in an XML parser is a bit of a drawback too. Still,
> parsers are easy to come by these days (Windows comes with one in a system
> DLL I think) and I prefer including a library, even a big one, over writing
> the code all over again myself any time.

At least for the engine, you don't have to write the code yourself as you
can use gtp.c and gtp.h from the gnugo code (we hope to sort out the
licensing issue). Look in play_gtp.c for how to make use of it, I don't
think it can get any more convenient than this.

For gnugo, and I suppose any program that is intended to be portable,
requirement of an XML-library would be a nightmare for portability and/or
ease of installation for the enduser. Another advantage is that GTP
scripts are very easy to write by hand (which has become an important
tool for investigating engine internals when s.th. goes wrong).

> My question is though: are you 100% sure that any future addition to GTP
> doesn't break any or all the parsers already out there? (Which IMO are all
> but one written too many already.) Even in XML I wouldn't be 100% sure, and

Well, the specification is so straightforward that I do have difficulty
seeing where it could get wrong.

Arend

_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go