Author: Dave Gomboc
Date: 03:29:33 09/10/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 10, 2002 at 05:40:56, martin fierz wrote: >On September 10, 2002 at 05:19:17, Dave Gomboc wrote: > >>If you can't see the belittlement in there, then you have less intellect then I >>give you credit for. >wow, thank you! > >>I took the time to look at it over a week before I posted here about it. Again, >>the state of the code is irrelevant. There is documentation of the database >>format provided -- so you don't have to even use that code to access the >>databases. You can write your own access code. >give me ONE good reason to post the database but not the access code to it. just >ONE. Why do you even ask for that? There _was_ code posted. >>I emailed the position to Jonathan and asked him if Chinook would play the right >>move -- he replied that it did. I assume that the search was cold (no filled >>hash from previous searches). So I guess it's not that bad a program. <shrug> > >that kind of test is plain stupid. cake will avoid the errors chinook made in >the match against lafferty on the 2-second level. it means *nothing*. Maybe Chinook would too today? Dave
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.