Author: Andreas Herrmann
Date: 22:45:57 09/23/02
Go up one level in this thread
On September 24, 2002 at 00:38:42, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On September 23, 2002 at 21:43:44, Andreas Herrmann wrote: > >>On September 23, 2002 at 20:49:25, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On September 23, 2002 at 20:04:13, Thomas Mayer wrote: >>> >>>>Hi Daniel, >>>> >>>>> Having said that, I'm also sceptic so far. But as far as I can tell, the only >>>>> thing which really speaks against Ruffian being original work is the fact >>>>> that.. well.. it doesn't happen every day that a very strong engine appears >>>>> and most of CCC-readers didn't hear of it before. That surely says something, >>>>> but it's very well possible that Ruffian _is_ the exception here. >>>> >>>>well, that's nothing against you, but to be honest: I absolutely do not >>>>understand the discussion about Ruffian the last view days... Instead to be >>>>happy that there is something new and something strong, it seems that most of us >>>>here are searching for a way to claim or proof that it is a clone... >>>> >>>>After having played some games with the engine I am absolutely sure that it is >>>>no clone. Also it does not play from outer space, but Ruffian is really really >>>>strong. In two little privat tests against Fritz 7 (6,5 - 3,5 in favor of Fritz) >>>>and Hiarcs 7.32 (7 - 3 in favor of Ruffian) it shows that it can bite. >>>> >>>>Besides: "most of CCC-readers didn't hear of it before" - well, might be a good >>>>idea for all of you to look a little bit more around where the heart of amateur >>>>computer chess beats, like FICS and ICC... I don't know when it was that I see >>>>Ruffian the first time there, but it is not as new as some think... And it is >>>>not only myself who has seen that this program IS strong... (e.g. I remember >>>>that the programmer of Tao remarked some weeks ago that it is very strong) >>>> >>>>And: why do you guys think that it is only for the pro's possible to write such >>>>strong engines - who knows, maybe Per-Ola has found something new... A couple of >>>>years ago nullmove was something new and it was a big step forward for computer >>>>chess... I am absolutely sure that there are still many things to discover in >>>>computer chess, maybe not as revolutionary then null move but they are there... >>> >>> >>>For me the problem is not having ideas but implementing knowledge of other(I >>>believe that if I understand how to implement knowledge of other people it will >>>also be more easy for me to implement my ideas). >>> >>>The next thing to do for me is implementing more winboard commands >>>and implementing hash tables in a better way. >>> >>>I wonder how did you learn the knowledge of other people about these things. >>> >>>Did you read source code of other programs? >>> >>>I even have problems in implementing non chess ideas that are only about reading >>>the winboard commands when I analyze. >> >>Hi Uri, >> >>i don't know what you are programming in your job. But writing interfaces or >>such things should some of the easiest things for a software developer. >>More difficult for a normal software developer like me, are only the special >>algorytms for chess programming. 90% of the source code in a chess program is >>absolutely unuseful in every standard application development like database GUIs >>and such things. >> >>Look to the engine-inf.htm from Tim Mann there is the whole wb protocoll and >>hints how to program, very well described. I have need before about 2 years only >>a few hours to implement the wb-1 interface with the most importtant commands >>into Holmes including logging in a file. And i am, as a delphi developer, have >>had no source code where i could have a look into. (very bad english - i know) >> >>If you want to implement the best way, use a second thread for the >>communication, like Tim Mann describes in the engine-inf.htm. Read the input >>buffer until you get a linefeed (#10) or the buffer is empty and store it in a >>own stack variable. This function you let run in a loop. >>So now if the main thread (= the chess engine) has time to work off the next >>command then the main thread takes the oldest command from your internal stack. >>That's absolutely easy to implement and has nothing to do with special computer >>chess programming. >> >>If you want i can send you my delphi code, but i think it doesn't help you as a >>C programmer. >> >>have a nice day >>Andreas > > >Actually, I think Uri's job has nothing to do with programming. My impression >is that his chess program is his first serious program. But maybe I don't have >it right. > >Uri, there is no substitution for doing. Read a lot, learn good techniques, but >don't forget to code, code, code! :-) > >Dave Hi Dave, if it is his first program that he has written, then i take my hat. Andreas
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.