Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: significant math

Author: Gian-Carlo Pascutto

Date: 13:51:35 11/19/02

Go up one level in this thread

On November 19, 2002 at 16:42:21, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>in other words, no evidence is acceptable?

I can't think of much that would do, certainly
nothing that has been produced here. There are
several ways I could be convinced without a real
proof, even.

If you, say, would rewrite Crafty in classical form,
spend time optimizing it, invite Vincent to do the
same and he ends up with something that's decidedly
slower than what you have now, then that's pretty good
evidence that for a program like Crafty bitboards are
the superior approach.

If the top 5 engine programmers speak out and all say
they use or switch to bitboards I'm also going to be
convinced it's the superior approach.

If after the switch to 64-bit hardware you end up
smashing me and Vincent by a significant margin then
I'm also going to be convinced.

Lots of ways to convince me, as long as they're not
based on hand-waving (you like that word, don't you?)


This page took 0.2 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.