Author: José Carlos
Date: 06:41:56 05/28/01
Go up one level in this thread
On May 28, 2001 at 03:55:15, Ed Schröder wrote: >On May 27, 2001 at 22:57:39, Peter McKenzie wrote: > >>On May 27, 2001 at 20:26:47, Bruce Moreland wrote: >> >><snip> >>> >>>I think it is interesting that so many people use the Nalimov stuff without any >>>concern that at some point while the program is playing, it is not their program >>>actually playing. That idea bothered me enough that I wrote my own stuff. >> >>Yes, this is one of the reasons (if not the main one) that I haven't put them >>into LambChop. It just goes against the grain for me to copy someone elses code >>into my program. I don't think this is a cut and dry issue and I have nothing >>against those using tablebases, but the more I think about it the more I suspect >>that I'll never include Nalimov support in my program. >> >>There are a number of ways to look at it. You could say that I didn't write the >>standard C library either, and yet I see fit to link that into my chess program. >> How are tablebases any different? Well, in some sense they aren't, and really >>the Nalimov user should be applauded for demonstrating excellent software >>re-use! >> >>But then writing a chess program isn't an exercise in software re-use otherwise >>we wouldn't do it at all, we'd all just go out and buy the latest Fritz or >>Shredder or Tiger or whatever. At some point you have to draw the line about >>what you are *not* going to re-use, of course that is a personal choice but >>there are also rules that apply for tournaments. >> >>Tablebase use is accepted practice these days, although I think it violates the >>old ICCA rules and I'm not sure if they've updated those rules yet. Those rules >>were there to stop things like people taking crafty and modifying a few lines >>and entering it into a tournament. Now this isn't quite the same as using >>tablebases, though there are *similarities* - both involve using someone else's >>chess algorithm code. The fundamental differene being that convention has come >>down in favour of using tablebases which is fine by me but not fine for me. >> >>Well, enough rambling from me - got to go work on my new 7 man tablebase >>compression scheme. > >:-) > >1.. When I started chess programming I bought a TRS-80 with borrowed money, >the PC wasn't even mine. > >2.. To develop my first chess program I bought an assembler program because >I was too lazy to write one myself. > >3.. I use alpha-beta, good for 90% of Rebel's strength and the idea isn't mine. > >4.. I use hash-tables, I did not invented it. > >5.. I use an iterative searching, aspiration search, killers, Q-Search all >got it from others. > >6.. The opening book is not written by me, heck even its format is not mine. > >What is left are the bugs, these are definitely mine. > >Ed Speaking seriously, the good thing of having "borrowed" all those things, is that you can make something new beyond the known things. If you had to reinvent all of that, a whole life wouldn't be enough to make something new. José C. (inventor of bugs)
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.