Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 13:03:46 02/16/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2004 at 13:20:00, Steven Edwards wrote: >From: Robert Hyatt (hyatt@crafty.cis.uab.edu) >Subject: Re: Chess in LISP >Newsgroups: rec.games.chess.computer >Date: 1997/04/07 > >Stefan Hahndel (hahndel@informatik.tu-muenchen.de) wrote: > >: In article <5i4bpe$or0@juniper.cis.uab.edu>, hyatt@crafty.cis.uab.edu (Robert >Hyatt) writes: >: [...] >: |> Nope. for the humor impaired, or non-computer types, LISP is *not* the >: |> language of choice for a chess program. Hard to read. very slow. >: |> Interpreted, even on the old "lisp" machines that were built for a >: |> while... >: Dear Bob, >: why not ? >: You think only about a alpha-beta style chess program and brute force. >: Is really absolutely impossible that someone will write an "intelligent", >: knowledge-based (or some other approach) chess program in lisp in future ? > >no. but they will probably be using a computer that is powered by >electrical energy produced by a self-sustaining nuclear fusion reaction. > >:) I am guessing that Lisp will have the approximate overhead of Java or VB.NET. Hence, you will have a factor of 4 handicap. Compared to the effect of the algorithms chosen, that is a trivial effect. If you invent some revolutionary new way of doing things, it may be dominatingly better than any other approach. For example, if a knowledge based approach has polynomial complexity for move choice and still makes choices as good as the current exponential models, you will beat every alpha-beta engine on the planet by a landslide. And (of course) once you develop the concept it should be possible to translate it to any other language of your choice. If development in Lisp is easier for you, then I would suggest that you use Lisp by all means.
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.