Author: Uri Blass
Date: 05:27:00 04/01/05
Go up one level in this thread
On April 01, 2005 at 02:59:08, Fabien Letouzey wrote: >On March 31, 2005 at 18:51:07, Günther Simon wrote: > >>Absolutely agreed! Admitting to be a cloner doesn't make it better IMO. >>Even if the few code changes (simple ones on a high level) really have >>an impact of around 40-50 ELO, I am quite sure Fabien would have >>tried the same techniques sooner or later, _if_ he had the time, but AFAIK >>he has very little time currently in developing Fruit. >>IMO the 'Toga extensions' just robbed Fruit's future... > >>Guenther > >You are correct that I would have tried similar additions, eventually. Many >common heuristics have been left out from Fruit, which does not mean I am not >aware of them of course. > >But please everybody, look at it this way: > >At the moment I am not working on Fruit, somebody else is (in a way). >(Note: don't worry, I will come back to chess). > >So: > >* Users who want to can access a strong(er) free engine (beneficial) >* Others (TDs) can refuse to include it in their tests, since the status is >clear (in the worst case: same as before) >* Programmers can have a look at the changes made from Fruit to Toga and ponder >whether it could be useful for them as well (unfortunately they are likely to >already have similar code in their engine). >* *I* too can benefit from Thomas' ideas (e.g. as a clue that I should try these >first) > >I see the best of both worlds, who has been harmed? Not me, so who else? > >Fabien. If both fruit and Toga play in a tournament that only one author is allowed to play then other authors can suffer from it. I think that the main problem is that the name of Toga does not begin with Fruit. If Toga is better than Fruit then I think that Toga should play in the premier division of Leo instead of Fruit. Uri
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.