Author: Matthias Gemuh
Date: 12:41:25 03/14/03
Go up one level in this thread
On March 14, 2003 at 14:53:12, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On March 14, 2003 at 08:44:57, Matthias Gemuh wrote: > >>Hi Jose, >>when you clone Pepito, it remains a Pepito clone. >>When you clone TSCP, you will have thrown almost all data structures and >>replaced a bunch of routines by the time you improve it by 200 Elo. >>By the time you hit +300 Elo, you probably have a complex bitboard engine with >>no trace of TSCP in it. That is the difference. >>Regards, >>Matthias. > >You can clone TSCP without improving it. > >Some clown named Josh Haglund (who was recently active on this board) "made" a >TSCP clone a couple years ago called Squash. All he did was change some strings. >He denied accusations that his program was a clone for a long time. > >The hilarious thing about Squash was the changelog--every time I released a new >version of TSCP, Josh would release a new version of Squash with _exactly the >same improvements_. > >The hilarious thing about Josh is that a few months ago, he started e-mailing me >asking me how to implement some stupid ideas, e.g., searching each ply for a >maximum of 5 seconds, and only searching 5 moves at the root of the tree. His >e-mails made it clear that he couldn't program his way out of a wet paper bag. > >-Tom Hi Tom, thanks for TSCP which is simple but very instructive for beginners. I too studied TSCP to grasp certain concepts before writing my bitboard BigLion from scratch, which borrowed no data structure and no routine from TSCP. I am surprised that some would clone TSCP and not strive to improve it drastically. But if they want some reputation, but lack programming knowledge, any clone does becomes a must :(. Regards, Matthias.
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.