Author: Roy Eassa
Date: 14:06:20 10/26/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 25, 2002 at 05:50:07, Sune Fischer wrote: >On October 25, 2002 at 00:10:20, Aloisio Ponti Lopes wrote: > >I don't like format either, in principle Christophe could make Tigers 15_a, 15_b >and 15_c (minor updates of some form) and take the first three spots with, >basicly, the same program! > >It is pretty rediculous, one author - one entry! > >I think they are doing it like that for users with old versions, they would like >to see how much better the new version is, should they go out and buy it or not, >that sort of thing. For that you need the comparison with previous versions. > >Personally I am only interested in "how well does the lastest program X compare >to latest program Y". Older versions simply do no longer represent what the >author is capable of and are therefore NOT interesting. > Perhaps they could have a rule something like this: If a new version of a program is submitted, the prior version's rating is no longer changable and disappears from the list. (It can still be used as a measuring stick to test submitted programs, but it no longer is printed on the list and its rating no longer changes.) The net effect would be what you seek: only the latest version of each program would show up on the list. But the older programs would still provide value in testing the new ones.
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.