Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 08:08:37 10/30/03
Go up one level in this thread
On October 30, 2003 at 10:59:59, Robert Hyatt wrote: <snip> > >> >>>have done this. Several of us tested our random numbers a few years ago. The >> >>Yes it was me testing it. You did *not*. Bullshit. Look at rec.games.chess.computer archives. I tested, Bruce tested, and John Stanback tested. We compared and posted all our results. It should be easy to find although I don't recall exactly when we had those discussions. John might remember. >> >>You never posted onto this subject. Another very accurate statement. Did you see any of the ICCA stuff on hashing in Cray Blitz? "I never posted on this subject". :) >> >>Like most programmers i did an experiment here and the average combination of 2 >>* 32 bits is just plain *incorrect*. >> >>>RNG from Numerical Recipes that I use is _very_ good. Particularly when I need >>>less than 2000 32-bit values to make less than 1000 64 bit numbers. >> >>>I've run _real_ tests using my random numbers. You can find my results, >>>Bruce's results, and John Stanback's results posted on r.g.c.c several years >>>ago. I saw less than one collision per 3 hours of searching. That can >>>be ignored easily. >> >>*you saw*, you *remember*. >> >>But you never used the 'average' RNG here. In fact you *did* use the average RNG >>in the past but it didn't work very well combining 2 x 32 bits. I _never_ used "the average RNG". Every version of Crafty ever released has had the Numerical Recipes RNG included. Any chance you will ever stop making this stuff up? The RNG in Crafty was lifted _directly_ from Cray Blitz, also, so you can't even go back there and say I used something else. I always needed a RNG that was under my control so I could make my book work on different machines, using the same binary values, which depend on the hash signatures. >> >>Yet you did not draw that conclusion. Someone else did for you. That's why >>Gijsbert Wiesenekker has created the RNG for Crafty. >> Nobody created that RNG for Crafty. It was a published RNG that I started using somewhere in the middle 1980's when I started working on the Cray and other machines at the same time and wanted a portable binary book. I don't know where you get your made-up information. But it is wrong. >>For the supercomputer i of course had to retest things again as things work >>differently there. So my last test is from around 8 hours ago. >> >>>> >>>>Now i'm sure you will show up with something that doesn't have multilineair >>>>connection, but that's not what i call the 'average' 32 bits RNG :) >>> >>>I have _always_ cited my RNG as an adequate solution to the problem. It >> >>*your* RNG? >> >>May i beg your pardon? >> >>You didn't even WRITE all that code in crafty. >> >>Gijsbert Wiesenekker did. You are wrong. This originally came fro Knuth volume 2, pages 26-27. I never claimed I wrote the code. In fact, the comments in utility.c quote Knuth as the source. Although the code itself came from the book Numerical Recipes as they distributed a CDRom with the source code for everything in it. I don't know who Gijsbert Wiesenekker is. If he wrote the RNG for Knuth, then he is the author. If not then he isn't the author. However, when I use the term "my RNG" it obviously means "the RNG _I_ am currently using" as opposed to anything else you might dream up. >> >>>is an "average RNG" that was published in the book "Numerical Recipes" 20+ >>>years ago. >> >>>>It's like saying using 'goto' is ok in a programming environment. Where this is >>>>certainly true, it should not be a policy to do so :) >>> >>> >>>Eh? _every_ program you write has goto's. (aka jumps). They are not >>>bad. In fact, they are _unavoidable_. >> >>goto is faster in some cases, because of the imperfection of compilers. >> >>It doesn't change neat programming concepts. >> >>Yet knowing your program uses inline assembly everywhere, it's no surprise that >>you fall that low. >> >> >>>>>On October 28, 2003 at 21:29:18, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>[snip]
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.