Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 22:12:16 07/20/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 21, 2000 at 00:58:29, Tom Kerrigan wrote: [snip] >My point is that giving away your source code doesn't necessarily make you a >better programmer. Saying that Bob Hyatt is one of the top 5 chess programmers >(partially) because Crafty is open source is bogus. Crafty recently won a high profile internet event, with the best commercial engines participating also. Crafty is *without any question* the strongest freely available chess engine. To offer *THAT* source code to the public is a service so large it cannot be expressed properly, except in the most glowing terms. Crafty epitomizes all of the most efficient techniques in modern chess programming. If it had the benefits of advanced book preparation by top experts it may well be the strongest program on earth. On the other hand, maybe not. But anyone with a shred of intelligence will be forced to agree that it is clearly the strongest program on earth where we get to look at the innards and see what makes it go. Beside that, the author is willing to spend tons of time explaining even the most rudimentary and idiotic questions about it. I have emailed Bob I don't know how many times (surely hundreds!). Even several years ago, when my questions were insultingly stupid, they were answered with detail, with patience, and with aplomb. You have a personality clash with Dr. Hyatt, which is odd to me because of how similar both of you are. Very high IQ, very highly motivated, very strong in your opinions, very brash, very self-assured, very straight-forward -- with no beating around the bush. If I were to look for someone with a style like that of Dr. Hyatt, you are the first person who comes to mind. Now, your opinions do not always match. But your ... hmmm ... mannerisms are similar. Both of you are "no-nonesense" guys who are intelligent and interesting. Vincent Diepeveen is in a similar mold. I'm a little err... "brash" but quick to admit that I don't know as much about chess programming as any of you. In any case, I think it might be good for all of us to "give it a rest." Now, you don't recognize Bob among "the all time greats" and certainly "greatness" is a measure of opinion. If you don't consider him in that way, then he's not that way to you. He holds that position in my estimation, but then again, that's me. I don't think we can come to an agreement on this. What (therefore) would be the point of further debate on the matter?
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.