vdbergh
vdbergh
I would also make the server generate the info message. In that way the worker does not need to be changed.
> Well, I wrote my PR-to-this-PR before seeing this comment, but, at any rate, the error messages refer to worker-side command line options, so I'm not certain that referring to...
> > Otherwise any server change requires a coordinated worker change. > > At the present time, I'm not sure that can be avoided? And I guess your general principle...
Sadly I am no longer allowed to run a webserver at work that is worldwide accessible. I will try to find some alternative.
@Disservin Thanks for the suggestions! @shermansiu Putting them on the arxiv would somewhat confuse the people I work with in the real world :)
Well the OP is mainly saying that only the patched files should be recompiled and not the whole source. But this is not how Stockfish is compiled if you do...
@StefanoD Can you give a concrete example of a unit test that would be useful in the context of a chess engine? IMHO the difficulty is that it is not...
@StefanoD Legal move generation is typically tested with perft. Your other examples in the first paragraph are not convincing. One doesn't care about best moves in individual positions in chess...
@Disservin No @StefanoD also gave legal move generation as an example. I don't quite know what `Position::legal()` does. If it is used in legal move generation then it will be...
@Disservin Ok. Perhaps `Position::legal()` only verifies that the move is pseudo legal?