Author: Roberto Waldteufel
Date: 17:48:29 07/18/98
Go up one level in this thread
On July 18, 1998 at 10:58:09, Don Dailey wrote: >On July 17, 1998 at 22:00:27, Roberto Waldteufel wrote: > >> >>On July 17, 1998 at 14:44:23, Christophe Theron wrote: >> >>>On July 17, 1998 at 13:49:55, Roberto Waldteufel wrote: >>> >>>>Hi Don, >>>> >>>>The more restrictions you add, the more programmers are excluded. I program in >>>>32-bit compiled Basic, and tweak intensively used code with Assembler, on a >>>>Pentium 333, so I guess that would disqualify me on three counts? I don't think >>>>there can be much argument that Assembler is best for performance, but harder to >>>>program in. So if a programmer accepts the challenge and puts in the extra >>>>effort to write an Assembler program that does exactly the same as an eqivalent >>>>C program, but twice as fast, surely this is a greater programming achievement? >>> >>>You are right. Your program should not be excluded because it is programmed in >>>Basic/Assembler. No problem. >>> >>>The Pentium 333 could be a problem if we decide that 300MHz is the limit, but >>>surely we could work around that in several ways. Maybe by giving you 10% less >>>time, as this was done in the last WMCCC in Paris when a fast computer was >>>playing against one of the provided K6-200. >>> >>>If we are wise enough (are we?) to try to solve such "problems" in a positive >>>way, the event could take place. >>> >>> >>> >>>>I don't think it is possible to completely separate "programming" from hardware. >>>>Programmers and programs exist only because of the hardware that supports them. >>>>To my mind, the "best chess programmer" is hardware dependant. It is about >>>>squeazing best possible chess out of a given hardware configuration, and as such >>>>I think that the "best programmer" of an Alpha is a different thing from the >>>>"best programmer" of an Intel. And in both cases, the programmer that writes an >>>>efficient Assembler program is likely to be the one to achieve the necessary >>>>efficiency,regardless of hardware. >>> >>>It is impossible to organize a stricly uniform platform event, I know. But it is >>>possible to get near that, which is interesting enough I think. >>> >>>We could say that the choice of the processor is one of the programmer's skills. >>>If we agree on "400MHz Alpha roughly as fast as 300MHz Intel for chess >>>programming", we are still comparing the programmer's skills. >>> >>> >>> >>>>If it is not to be "anything goes" in terms of programming language, you get >>>>into a minefield of who to allow and who to exclude. What's wrong with Pascal, >>>>for instance? In the format you suggest, it should be called the "Chess >>>>C-programmer's Championship"! >>> >>>IMO, anything goes in term of programming language. So no problem with your >>>program or a Pascal program or a Cobol program. >>> >>> >>> >>> Christophe >> >>Hi Christophe, >> >>Sounds good to me. I have always programmed out of necessity for the computer I >>owned at the time, which happens to be a P333 at present. It will run OK on >>other Pentiums, but I don't know where I would get hold of one! For a uniform >>(or nearly so) platform, it would probably be best if some publicity-seeking >>company could be persuaded to loan the hardware for the event. Then everyone >>gets the same hardware, and nobody has to travel with their computer "on their >>backs". I would be travelling alone, and transporting my PC as well as my >>ordinary luggage would pose very great logistical problems for me. >> >>I think the best thing about this kind of event is the chance to meet other >>programmers in person and exchange ideas. I have never actually met anyone else >>who programs chess except on the net. >> >>Best wishes, >>Roberto > >Well you are in for a treat then. My very first tournament was a >wonderful time for me even though my program almost finished in last >place. I had no expectations and could not have cared less, I simply >had a great time. > >In my case, just about everyone was willing to share their good >ideas with me and were very helpful to me. In particular, Tony >Sherzer the programmer of BeBe was very encouraging and made me >feel a part of the group. It's too bad I cannot tell him that >now. > >As soon as I got home I scrapped the program I had and started from >scratch on a new one which was light years ahead of the previous >one based on knowledge I had gained at this tournament. > >If you come, you will get treated the same way I did at this first >tournament. (Including the part where we beat up on your program :-) > >- Don Hi Don, I very much hope I can come, but it won't be easy for me. I would be on a very tight budget, the dates would be critical, and I don't know if I can transport my PC or not. If that is not possible, would there be any possibility to borrow the use an MIT computer when I arrived? If firm dates can be arranged by September it would help, because there are several dates which I have to commit myself to being here on, but if I know in advance when to avoid I have a better chance. Best wishes, Roberto
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.