Author: Roman Hartmann
Date: 13:33:13 01/03/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 03, 2006 at 16:18:39, Stuart Cracraft wrote: >On January 03, 2006 at 13:28:11, Roman Hartmann wrote: > >>On January 03, 2006 at 10:28:15, Michael Diosi wrote: >> >>>On January 03, 2006 at 10:18:52, Stefan Schiffermüller wrote: >>> >>>>So many chess engines became so strong last year. I suppose the reason is the >>>>open source code of Fruit. Now every more or less talented chess programmer can >>>>build an engine that is at least as strong as Fruit. (Take the Fruit code and >>>>change it, that it can not be called a Fruit clone.) Very talented chess >>>>programmers could be even stronger by combination of the Fruit knowledge with >>>>their own experiences. I believe, if the Fruit code were not open than Fruit >>>>would be strongest engine now and Shredder were the second. >>>> >>>>Please understand me correctly. I want only express that the author of Fruit is >>>>the real hero of this revolution in computer chess. I dont want to degrade the >>>>achievments of other authors. >>>> >>>>Best Regards >>>>Stefan Schiffermüller >>> >>>Hi, >>> >>>If anyone makes a clone they will be discovered, exposed and embarrassed in >>>public. However you are right, Fabien has created a more positive environment by >>>showing that it is possible to make a very strong chess program. >>> >>>Best, >>> >>>Michael >> >>I guess the topic (of the initial post) isn't about cloning but rather about >>recycling ideas of fruit which some people seem to have done sucessfully. >> >>regards >>Roman > >Is it truly Fruit or just Fruit the-well-written-and-debugged-Everymans? > >It seems like Fruit is not revolutionary except that a) the author >released the code to b) a very well-debugged program. Yes, I agree with that. Still with the appearence of Fruit people or better the authors realized that a lot of complicated things are probably unnessecary and that less is sometimes more. So Fruit def. helped in that regard even if you don't skim the sources to take out something for your engine. >That in itself is revolutionary but I am not sure that permits anyone >to recycle its ideas as those ideas are Everyman's. It was def. very nice from Fabien 'to give something back'. >(When I see the female computer chess programmer I will change it to >Everyperson, but I haven't, since at least Kathe Spracklen days...) True. So far I didn't met too many female chess programmers. Roman >Stuart
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.