Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Chest executable (Dann?)

Author: leonid

Date: 17:35:16 05/14/01

Go up one level in this thread


On May 14, 2001 at 15:27:20, Dann Corbit wrote:

>On May 14, 2001 at 15:01:10, Heiner Marxen wrote:
>
>>On May 14, 2001 at 13:50:51, leonid wrote:
>>
>>>On May 14, 2001 at 12:57:07, Heiner Marxen wrote:
>>>
>>>>On May 14, 2001 at 08:47:07, leonid wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hi, Heiner!
>>>>>
>>>>>This time one personal demand. Can you send me your mate solver? I tried two
>>>>>times to do this by going into your site but something I did in a wrong way.
>>>>>
>>>>>I use Windows ME. If you have somewhere executive file, it will be the best. If
>>>>>whatever you will need to find in my program, you will just ask and my response
>>>>>will be instant.
>>>>
>>>>I myself do not offer any executables.  Windows executables are not even
>>>>constructible for me.  But Dann Corbit has made a WIN32 executable,
>>>>and offers all my sources, together with the EXE as
>>>>   ftp://cap.connx.com/pub/chest/CHEST319.ZIP (674k)
>>>>If you want just the EXE (and the READMEs):
>>>>   ftp://cap.connx.com/pub/chest/chest319.exe  (268k)
>>>>   ftp://cap.connx.com/pub/chest/README_LONG    (30k)
>>>>   ftp://cap.connx.com/pub/chest/README_QUICK
>>>>   ftp://cap.connx.com/pub/chest/README
>>>
>>>
>>>Thanks, Heiner! Before I download not from this sources. I went directly to your
>>>site and can be that I download something for different system.
>>>
>>>
>>>>You should be able to download the above URLs with any browser or ftp program.
>>>>I suspect that Windows ME does happily execute WIN32 executables, so the
>>>>exe should be directly usable for you.
>>>
>>>Windows Me is not that simple to use. Or I myself screw somehow my Windows ME,
>>>or it is very prone to instability. It hung all the time. Last time just before
>>>I came here.
>>
>>Hi Leonid,
>>
>>I have no experience whatsoever with any Windows Version.
>>
>>Hi Dann,
>>
>>Can you tell whether the chest319.exe from your ftp site will run
>>on Windows ME without any trouble?  Or whether it can be used from old DOS?
>>(Excuse me if these are stupid questions)
>
>I must admit that Windows ME is a botched bletcherous attempt at an operating
>system.  Everyone I know who has installed it has despised it for many reasons
>soon thereafter.  I have Windows 2000 on all of my personal machines and on my
>work machines.  However, we do have WinME here and I have successfully run Chest
>on it.

Thanks for this! At least now I don't feel me to be alone. I thought about
reinstalling my Windows 98 but don't want to go back.

Leonid.


>>>>Chest is a console application.  For usage and examples please read README_LONG.
>>>>
>>>>>Now I am in changing few thing in my mate solver and for this I need some
>>>>>excellent mate solver as reference. It is not that simple to find as somebody
>>>>>could imagine. Before I had the impression that Genius 2 could do the work but
>>>>>later found that its moves number is fixed by 99 limit. The same is true for
>>>>>other best chess programs and even, to my susprise, for mate solver Mate 2.0.
>>>>>Mate 2.0 (he is in the package with Hiarcs program) do not permit to indicate
>>>>>directly number of moves that you would like for him to see. Its number of moves
>>>>>is once again limited to 99. He do not indicate the time when he think.
>>>>>It could be that I don't know how to use it. Hiarcs is not very talkative as
>>>>>programe in general. The best in its openess, between all program that I ever
>>>>>used, is Rebel. If I will one day end my chess program then I will try to make
>>>>>everything in my program as clear and accessible as this program did.
>>>
>>>>Is the limit 99
>>>>(a) for the number of legal moves in a (single) position, or
>>>>(b) for the depth of the search?
>>>
>>>As far as I could understant it is limit for legal number of moves that initial
>>>position contain. As I could see, when initial position had 54 moves then this
>>>number was exactly 54. But when I asked for solving  position that have initial
>>>moves 112 (just example), then number was indicated as 99. In the same time
>>>program indicate how many from those initial moves it already have seen.
>>
>>Fine, that is case (a).  Chest is fine, here.
>>
>>
>>>>If (a): ok, Chest does better (222)
>>>
>>>I still must put my numbers as far. For now it is only 200.
>>>
>>>>If (b): sorry, Chest is limited even lower (30, with recompile: 63)
>>>
>>>If you speak about maximum number of moves to see, then you have one more
>>>advantange. Mine can go as far as 13. This is why all my positions never goes
>>>beyond 13 moves. Probably, I even will not change this limit very soon.
>>
>>Yes, that is what I spoke about.
>>And yes, 13 is nearly always enough.
>>That can change dramatically, once you have a hash table.
>>Then depthes beyond 20 are sometimes quite accessible, most notably
>>with pawn endgames.
>>
>>> My goal
>>>is to go to my chess part as soon, as I will find some way to speed my code when
>>>working with mate solver. Only when efficency of my chess part will reach mate
>>>solver code, then it will have sense to extend those 13 moves. For now my chess
>>>part is deadly slow. Its brute force can only slightly overrun other programs in
>>>10 plys search. In mate solver (forgetting about your that is wonderful
>>>exception) speed of mine for mate can go easely between 10 and 100 times beyond
>>>every best programs speed. I must absolutly recuperate part of it  into my chess
>>>playing part. Mate solver is the best spot to see how much real speed you can
>>>obtain but not the first place to use it. I hope that you will do the same. You
>>>have bright chances to succeed. When you will do this, we will have even more
>>>things in commune to speak about.
>>
>>Do you want me to also extend my program to really play chess?
>>If so, I'm sorry.  I have absolutely no plans to do so.  I'm specialized
>>in mate problems, and as far as I can see, that will remain so.
>>May be some special ideas which I will implement for my mate solver are
>>adaptable to playing programs, but most probably I will not do so myself.
>
>I think it is a mistake to make chest play chess.  I think what it does is
>entirely adequate and making a hybrid will be more work for little gain.  Your
>planned extension to tablebase files will give me all that I should ever want
>from such a tool.
>
>I think (however) that Chest can be used to play chess, but not as some people
>might think.  On a multiple CPU machine, you could have chest buzzing away on
>the root position.  Often, it will salvage a mate that other programs simple
>won't discover for a very, very long time.  Hence, it could offer advice to
>chess programs.  This could make them play better chess.  Also, general purpose
>chess programs could very much benefit from a mate solving mode.  The methods of
>a program like chest could be employed in such a case.



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.