Author: Ratko V Tomic
Date: 13:31:34 10/19/00
Go up one level in this thread
> I don't need reverse engineering to understand what other programmers do. > It's clear enough when you play with a program for some time. I didn't mean that you necessarily disassembled their code and extracted their algorithms/ideas out of there. That's one way to reverse engineer some software, but not the only or necessarly the most effective. If you're doing similar things as someone else, and have developed a good intuition of the domain, observing outputs for carefully selected small sample of inputs often works better. But, you did mention on few occasions within the last year that you do know how Lang and Kittinger do their magic long lines in specific types of positions. Although you were somewhat dismissive about that technique (which you didn't actually describe but just stated that you knew how it is done), it seemed to me that the dismissive attitude decreased over time. Coupled with the arrival of the GT phenomenon (which reminds me most of arrival of Constelation), it occured to me that you may have experimented a bit further with what you have reconstructed as a simulator of the Lang's and Kittingers magic far-sight algorithm (and which actually may have been entirely your invention and it merely mimicked the behavior of their programs). Then a new possibility suddenly opened up for refining it in a substantial way, maybe a much more accurate algorithm to filter out the bad lines or some such, that the other two may have missed (or the opportunity may have not existed at all in their form of the algorithm). And then this new code you were toying with probably surprised you the most.
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.