I just want to add that all those are meaningless for the results,!There was possible three repetition rule draw claim last time after ...
I agree. But it may be useful for authors to improve their programs.I just want to add that all those are meaningless for the results,!There was possible three repetition rule draw claim last time after ...
as draw claiming is not a must here, but a possibility (like LGPGNVER says)
Yes agreed too, as it might indicate a bug in one of the opponents.I agree. But it may be useful for authors to improve their programs.I just want to add that all those are meaningless for the results,!There was possible three repetition rule draw claim last time after ...
as draw claiming is not a must here, but a possibility (like LGPGNVER says)
Also both engines not claiming the 50-move rule draw is insane. Do both engines still think they have winning chances?Yes agreed too, as it might indicate a bug in one of the opponents.I agree. But it may be useful for authors to improve their programs.I just want to add that all those are meaningless for the results,!There was possible three repetition rule draw claim last time after ...
as draw claiming is not a must here, but a possibility (like LGPGNVER says)
Regards,
Günther
By far, the majority of exceptions returned by lgpgnver wbec.pgn wbec.out 999 were {no draw found}.
Please download new version(1.14) from my site.By far, the majority of exceptions returned by lgpgnver wbec.pgn wbec.out 999 were {no draw found}.
I do a lot of adjucating games to save time in cases of obvious outcomes. And lgpgnver doesn't recognize draw games adjucated by humans. In my case, i get "lots" of (no draw found) messages, and would like to see this glitch addressed in a future update.
Regards
Dave
To print out only games with wrong result tryI just want to add that all those are meaningless for the results,!There was possible three repetition rule draw claim last time after ...
as draw claiming is not a must here, but a possibility (like LGPGNVER says)
Regards,
Günther
If neither engine claims draw by 50-move/repetition, the game can continue forever. Surely this would be a problem for TDs (imagine you are away for a week end)?!I just want to add that all those are meaningless for the results,!There was possible three repetition rule draw claim last time after ...
as draw claiming is not a must here, but a possibility (like LGPGNVER says)
Regards,
G�nther
The following game seems to be the longest game that winboard can acceptIf neither engine claims draw by 50-move/repetition, the game can continue forever. Surely this would be a problem for TDs (imagine you are away for a week end)?!I just want to add that all those are meaningless for the results,!There was possible three repetition rule draw claim last time after ...
as draw claiming is not a must here, but a possibility (like LGPGNVER says)
Regards,
G�nther
Fabien.
PS: "Luckily", WinBoard will crash at some point.
I forgot to add that the game was posted originally by Dann Corbit.The following game seems to be the longest game that winboard can acceptIf neither engine claims draw by 50-move/repetition, the game can continue forever. Surely this would be a problem for TDs (imagine you are away for a week end)?!I just want to add that all those are meaningless for the results,!There was possible three repetition rule draw claim last time after ...
as draw claiming is not a must here, but a possibility (like LGPGNVER says)
Regards,
G�nther
Fabien.
PS: "Luckily", WinBoard will crash at some point.
If I try to add one more move then my winboard is closed.
Obviously a joke from you, but I will answer anyway.This result means that engines may assume that games take no more than 1000 plies for every practical reason because if the game takes more moves then winboard is closed.
I am afraid that Movei of today may crush in analysis of games of almost 1000 moves because after 990 plies it may look in analysis at ply 1001 and get out of bounds.
If neither engine claims draw by 50-move/repetition, the game can continue forever. Surely this would be a problem for TDs (imagine you are away for a week end)?!I just want to add that all those are meaningless for the results,!There was possible three repetition rule draw claim last time after ...
as draw claiming is not a must here, but a possibility (like LGPGNVER says)
Regards,
G�nther
Fabien.
PS: "Luckily", WinBoard will crash at some point.
Hi,Well, I dont know why George and you answered to my posting?
I did not make the investigation but Dann, nor was I speaking
about 50 moves draws?
My only point was that Leos results are correct as draw claiming
in the mentioned examples (3 time rep) is not a must...
No I just wanted to prevent the impression that Leos results wereHi,Well, I dont know why George and you answered to my posting?
I did not make the investigation but Dann, nor was I speaking
about 50 moves draws?
My only point was that Leos results are correct as draw claiming
in the mentioned examples (3 time rep) is not a must...
I haven't studied the examples. My understanding is that you said draw claiming is not a must in engines (in general).
WinBoard has no adjudication feature (it does not even know the draw rules anyway). How do you garantee that the games are going to end?
Fabien.
Thanks. I'll try the new version. It will really increase the usefulness of LGPGNVER if user adjucated games are ignored. For an example, Arena automatically adds the comment "1/2-1/2 User Adjucation" at the end of adjucated draws.Please download new version(1.14) from my site.By far, the majority of exceptions returned by lgpgnver wbec.pgn wbec.out 999 were {no draw found}.
I do a lot of adjucating games to save time in cases of obvious outcomes. And lgpgnver doesn't recognize draw games adjucated by humans. In my case, i get "lots" of (no draw found) messages, and would like to see this glitch addressed in a future update.
Regards
Dave
In case of adjudicating a game all what you need is to write in the comment for the game result something like
{...adjudi...} or {...award...}
and you'll get grom lgpgnver
Warning level :2
Analyze result:1/2-1/2 {awarded(adjudicated)??}
To get rid of printing such games, type
LGPGNVER xxx.pgn xxx.res 2
and you'll get messages only for games with warning level higher than 2.
Best regards,
LG
I disagree. A crash is a sign of a serious software defect. In the case of an array bounds over-write, this is a software exploit that people can use to cause billions of dollars in damage and destroy your network.Obviously a joke from you, but I will answer anyway.This result means that engines may assume that games take no more than 1000 plies for every practical reason because if the game takes more moves then winboard is closed.
I am afraid that Movei of today may crush in analysis of games of almost 1000 moves because after 990 plies it may look in analysis at ply 1001 and get out of bounds.
1) It is a bug in WinBoard and in no case should anyone rely on it (hopefully it will be fixed in the future as a separate argument).
2) xboard-compatible engines should not assume that WinBoard is going to be the interface (hopefully a lot of xboard software does not have the same bug as WinBoard).
IMO engines are "allowed" to crash (like a player could faint during a tournament), but interfaces are not. It is the TD's decision what happens in this case (e.g. immediate loss).
Fabien.
I have no idea how to use array bounds over-write in order to cause billion dollars of demage(not that I think to do it even if I will know).I disagree. A crash is a sign of a serious software defect. In the case of an array bounds over-write, this is a software exploit that people can use to cause billions of dollars in damage and destroy your network.Obviously a joke from you, but I will answer anyway.This result means that engines may assume that games take no more than 1000 plies for every practical reason because if the game takes more moves then winboard is closed.
I am afraid that Movei of today may crush in analysis of games of almost 1000 moves because after 990 plies it may look in analysis at ply 1001 and get out of bounds.
1) It is a bug in WinBoard and in no case should anyone rely on it (hopefully it will be fixed in the future as a separate argument).
2) xboard-compatible engines should not assume that WinBoard is going to be the interface (hopefully a lot of xboard software does not have the same bug as WinBoard).
IMO engines are "allowed" to crash (like a player could faint during a tournament), but interfaces are not. It is the TD's decision what happens in this case (e.g. immediate loss).
There is no excuse for a crash. "I give up!" and exit is fine. Crash is not.
P.S.
The maximum legal game is less than 6000 full moves. So 12000 ply is enough.
Winboard has a defect. Assuming 500 moves maximum is a humilation. Especially when you know that it is a purely artificial limit.
Do you remember this famous quote:
"Nobody will ever need more than 640K RAM!"
In my mind, "If there are more than 1000 plies, just overwrite memory." is not only a bad decision, it is negligent and irresponsible.
This is how most virus and internet worms operate.I have no idea how to use array bounds over-write in order to cause billion dollars of demage(not that I think to do it even if I will know).I disagree. A crash is a sign of a serious software defect. In the case of an array bounds over-write, this is a software exploit that people can use to cause billions of dollars in damage and destroy your network.Obviously a joke from you, but I will answer anyway.This result means that engines may assume that games take no more than 1000 plies for every practical reason because if the game takes more moves then winboard is closed.
I am afraid that Movei of today may crush in analysis of games of almost 1000 moves because after 990 plies it may look in analysis at ply 1001 and get out of bounds.
1) It is a bug in WinBoard and in no case should anyone rely on it (hopefully it will be fixed in the future as a separate argument).
2) xboard-compatible engines should not assume that WinBoard is going to be the interface (hopefully a lot of xboard software does not have the same bug as WinBoard).
IMO engines are "allowed" to crash (like a player could faint during a tournament), but interfaces are not. It is the TD's decision what happens in this case (e.g. immediate loss).
There is no excuse for a crash. "I give up!" and exit is fine. Crash is not.
P.S.
The maximum legal game is less than 6000 full moves. So 12000 ply is enough.
Winboard has a defect. Assuming 500 moves maximum is a humilation. Especially when you know that it is a purely artificial limit.
Do you remember this famous quote:
"Nobody will ever need more than 640K RAM!"
In my mind, "If there are more than 1000 plies, just overwrite memory." is not only a bad decision, it is negligent and irresponsible.
If other people know how to do it then they are certainly better programmers than me.
I bet that most of the chess program can crash if you give them some illegal FEN.
I use some assumptions that are correct for legal positions(for example that king cannot be under attack from 2 diagnols and that a side cannot have 2 kings).
If you give movei illegal positions when one of the assumptions does not hold then it may crash(I am afraid that I do not remember all the assumptions that I use so correcting that problem is not a trivial task).
Unfortunately I learned about these kind of assumptions from the only code that I read most of it(tscp).
I guess that I am not going to release new movei in the near future (I have no time before WCCC to care about these problems and even after WCCC I guess that it will take at least some weeks to find all the possible problems and fix them.
Uri
I'm too tight-fisted with memory. No way I'm going to have something like game_history[12000]The maximum legal game is less than 6000 full moves. So 12000 ply is enough.
Return to Archive (Old Parsimony Forum)
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests