Author: Ryan B.
Date: 01:35:26 12/24/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 24, 2005 at 04:10:11, Paul Jacobean Sacral wrote: >On December 24, 2005 at 03:32:31, Robert Hollay wrote: > >> I just don't want to drive away a valuable progammer from here. Don't know >>how many lines he changed in Fruit, but he succeeded to make it significantly >>stronger. > >Exactly. Tueschen's comments seem to ignore that current Toga versions are >completely compliant to the Gnu Public License conditions (IOW, open source). >Maybe he doesn't understand what open source is about. Taking open source code >and improving it is exactly what the o.s. idea goes for. > >The "problem" is that it has worked a bit too good here, obviously more than the >original programmer could stand. So he closed the source. > >So who should be our hero, the one who opened but soon closed the source after >collecting some additional ideas from others, or the one who did exactly what >the open source idea is about and provides a strong engine for free? > >Make your choice... > >(Make use of the 1% which distinguishes you from a chimp! :-)) ) > >Yours truly Paul J. Sacral My hero is the one who did more than 99% of the work I guess. I do not talk down to or disrespect the less than 1% as it is a fun hobby for Thomas and I see nothing wrong with that. I think you do not understand though that most of the gain by Toga over Fruit 2.1 was based on fewer than 10 lines of code and a few settings changes that where off by default because they where not tested yet. Also Toga has changes that help mostly in blitz making the early blitz tests look great and that seams to be what many people judge an engine by now days. Notice that Fruit 2.2 is still stronger than Toga 1.1 and the gap will only grow bigger. Ryan
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.