Author: David Rasmussen
Date: 02:18:01 12/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 24, 2002 at 04:22:12, Frank Sgarra wrote: > > >i belife nobody would write a chess program completly in assembler today >may be only some very little pieces of code. > > >it makes no sense to write the engine in C++ (fully OO) instead of C >because the _MAIN_ problem in chess ist the algorithm and _not_ >the question weatcher c or c++. It makes a lot of sense to write a chess engine in pure C++. At least as much sense as it makes writing it in pure C. C++ doesn't mean object orientation. C++ is a multiparadigm language. OO is one of the paradigms supported. C++ isn't Java. It is bad C++ design to make everything a class. You can use C++ as a C like language and still have many benefits like type safety, better I/O, templates etc. A lot of engines are written with portability in mind, so pure assembly language is not an option. Also, it typically makes for a bad design unless you're a very skilled assembly language programmer. So higher level languages are the better choice in that case. C++ is superior in anyway to C in that regard IMO. /David
This page took 0.01 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.