Author: Daniel Clausen
Date: 14:36:51 12/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 29, 2002 at 16:33:03, John Lowe wrote:
>On December 29, 2002 at 14:37:13, Daniel Clausen wrote:
[snip]
>>Sargon
>>
>>PS. Let engines play (w/ or w/o book) but with activated screen saver is also
>>yet another test ;)
>
>Sargon!!!!! My first mentor!!!!! ((((x))))
That's good to hear. :) I always enjoyed playing against "Sargon 3" on the
Amiga. It didn't have a feature-rich interface, but that only added to the
attraction the engine had to me. :) [I never liked chess programs which require
a certain graphic-/sound-card - sorry John! ;)]
>I don't remember you being cynical! :(
Sorry to disappoint you, sometimes I am. :) The last comment (about playing with
activated screen saver) was not meant cynical really though, but more as a joke.
(AFAIK someone ran an engine-engine test w/ activated screen saver on, which
made me laugh out loud :p)
>I learned to talk asm because you had no secrets..... (:
So you had to book which contained the source code of Sargon too? I got it from
the library, but back then I didn't understand enough about Assembler to 'dig
into the source'. Today, I know enough about Assembler not to touch it anymore.
(no pun intended ;) [I understand you program your engine in assembler, because
you _enjoy_ doing so. That's the best reason one could have, no matter what
someone is doing. :)]
>I'm wondering if it's time to ask CCC for sub-divisions in the messageboard.
I think this idea came up several times.
I know some message boards where this works pretty good, and others where it
doesn't. I like the idea in general, but I don't think that the programmers of
CCC want to do that. (based on the silence of them on these threads) Switching
to a complete different forum system is a _huge_ amount of work...
>I have narrow interests and a (?) sense of humour, many people are interested
>in engine performance, some in buying/using programs, many in cutting edge
>programming, some of us only want to swap ideas with our peers and above and
>learn from the great and good. If I post a question with an obvious answer I
>don't need "putting down" - however gently. I usually have more difficulty with
>"Chessprogrammerese" than anything else.
Since most people specify rather good topic-names, I can easily skip the
articles I'm not interested in. (of course, after some responses the body of the
message sometimes doesn't have a whole lot to do with the subject anymore, (like
this one :) but that's normal I guess)
Furthermore, after a while people find out, which peoples articles are 'worth
reading' and which not. ('worth reading' is subjectively meant here)
That together with the fact, that we don't have 200+ articles a day, makes me
think that the current system works just fine.
>There must be a place for party games and banter?
The would be the Chess "Thinkers" Forum, no? ;)
Sargon
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.