# 2024 Mar 6

[Mathmagician] I took a quick look at the first draft, you seem to have made
similar decisions to what I did for my variant UCI spec.

From the miscellaneous questions: how large the numeric arguments can be is
actually somewhat important. I had my maximum supported hash size as 2 ^ 32,
but that broke cutechess.

For multiple search limits, my engine stops once any of them are met.

[En-En] Interesting. I dug up the original which has proved very useful for
designing my own interfacer. The FSM diagram is particularly invaluable. I'll
double-check it a bit later and see if there are any comments I feel the need
to make.

[Mathmagician] One thing that would be good (if possible) would be a program to
test compliance with the standard.

[toanth] That would be amazing. But probably a lot of work I guess.

[Mathmagician] Yeah, and it might not be possible to test every part of it.

[expo] Yes! this is my actual ultimate goal – the thing I actually care about
making. And I think it's doable. (Maybe not testing compliance with every part,
but with most parts.)

[Twipply] SF fails.

[analog hors] Obviously impossible. SF passes by default because whatever spec
becomes popular must be built to make its behaviour count as correct.

[Twipply] "I am the standard" – SF.