Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 21:18:27 06/14/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 14, 1998 at 18:32:20, Hristo wrote: >>computation time to come to a valid conclusion as it is going to take my >>search algorithm to reach that same conclusion. But, from experience, >>my >>search algorithm is going to be orders of magnitude simpler, and more>bug- >>free. > >Bob(my Lord :-)) . >Crafty is not an example of bug free and simple software. >Bug-free is a level of debuging capabilities not an algorithm! >Besides what is the point ... even if it takes more time to debug ... > >Hristo Because in this instance, "more time" might be "infinite time." I did a slow smart search in the middle 70's... and it was a huge program (peaking at 100,000 lines of code for *just* the chess playing stuff, having no databases stuff, no features other than playing chess). It shrank to 10K lines of code when everyone "went exhaustive" starting in 1976. And the bugs are much easier to find in a smaller program. If you look at an evaluation function, it becomes terribly "intertwined" with this feature affecting that feature, which affects "those" features, and so forth. From my experience, it is easier when everything isn't a "special case"...
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.