gtp April 2006

gtp@lists.lysator.liu.se

3 participants
5 discussions

Start a nNew thread

Version 2 release?
by Evan Daniel 10 Aug '06

10 Aug '06

Any idea when version 2 will be finalized? Evan

2 1

Re: [gtp] Play command
by Markus Enzenberger 07 Apr '06

07 Apr '06

On Thursday 06 April 2006 20:24, William M. Shubert wrote: > On Thu, 2006-04-06 at 18:17 -0600, Markus Enzenberger wrote: > > I think it would be good enough, if the specification mentions, that a Go > > engine does not necessarily have to be able to play moves by the same > > color in a row, to keep GTP controllers from making this assumption > > without real necessity. Most tasks, like playing games, do not need > > support for non-alternating play. > > How do you handle free placement of handicap stones? NeuroGo can initialize its data structures from a position, which is good enough for setup positions (if no moves are played yet) and fixed handicap. I had no special code for free handicap placement, I always considered free handicap to be the same as the opponent answering your moves with a pass for a certain number of times in the beginning of the game.

1 0

Re: [gtp] Play command
by Markus Enzenberger 07 Apr '06

07 Apr '06

On Wednesday 05 April 2006 18:45, Evan Daniel wrote: > I would like to suggest that GTP version 3 have some way of allowing > engines to support only alternating play. > > I could fake the support by inserting a pass move in such cases, but > that seems inelegant. Similarly, I'd rather not add a function that > plays illegal moves. I faced the same problem: old versions of NeuroGo did not support non-alternating play. There are a few things that you can do a bit more efficiently if you make this assumption. I think it would be good enough, if the specification mentions, that a Go engine does not necessarily have to be able to play moves by the same color in a row, to keep GTP controllers from making this assumption without real necessity. Most tasks, like playing games, do not need support for non-alternating play. - Markus

1 0

Play command
by Evan Daniel 06 Apr '06

06 Apr '06

I'm in the process of rewriting GoFigure, and currently my board library implements a very strict Tromp-Taylor ruleset. Among other things, this means it requires alternating play. It would be possible to extend the library to support non-alternating play, but I'm not yet sure what the right way to do that is. I would like to suggest that GTP version 3 have some way of allowing engines to support only alternating play. I could fake the support by inserting a pass move in such cases, but that seems inelegant. Similarly, I'd rather not add a function that plays illegal moves. Evan Daniel

1 0

Finalizing GTP version 2?
by Gunnar Farneb�ck 02 Apr '06

02 Apr '06

Recently there has been an increasing interest in adding more official commands to GTP. Considering that the current draft specification has been stable (to choose a positive word) for a very long time now I don't think it's a good idea to make those changes to GTP version 2. Some people may wonder why it's still a draft and with the risk of embarrassing myself I can reveal that mainly it has been stalled on me wanting to track down information for the Credits section but not finding enough inspiration to actually do that. To get things moving again I propose finalizing the version 2 specification by the radical approach of simply removing the empty Examples and Credits sections from the draft, then opening up development of version 3. Does anybody see a problem with this plan? Is there any fatal flaw in the specification draft that has to be fixed first? In an attempt to help development of version 3 along I've set up a Wiki at http://trac.gnugo.org/gtp. It's currently bare but you can help filling it with relevant information yourselves. /Gunnar

3 4

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

gtp April 2006