Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 19:22:24 05/08/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 08, 2004 at 22:19:47, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On May 08, 2004 at 22:01:47, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On May 08, 2004 at 21:37:00, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On May 08, 2004 at 21:14:04, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >>> >>>>On May 08, 2004 at 21:04:19, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>> >>>>You are just flaming as usual. >>>> >>>>Show us the outputs of cray blitz. No one beliefs you. Your thesis is unfindable >>>>too. Show it. >>> >>>It is available through University Microfilm. I've told you that previously. I >> >>Where must i email to to get a copy of that? Going to alabama myself is a bit >>far. paying for reproduction costs is no problem. > >Do you have a web browser? Use it. University Microfilm has _nothing_ to do >with UAB, Alabama or any other university. It is a service most universities >use to archive dissertations and theses... > >> >>I have like 10 programmers here in europe who all are looking forward to seeing >>it. > >Apparently not very interested. Or else any one of them would have discovered >exactly how to obtain a copy... > > >> >>>have hard copy. Remember that I once told you all my files were lost??? That >>>would include _all_ of my files, including the electronic copy of my thesis. >>>But if you can figure out how to contact university microfilm, they can provide >>>what you want. >>> >>> >>>> Show the source code of cray blitz. You had a posting previous >>>>week indicating you have it. >>> >>>Show the source of your program... >>> >>>I have a printout. 66 lines X 2 columns, front and back. 60,000 lines of >>>FORTRAN. 22,000 lines of ASM. That is all I have as I have said repeatedly.. >> >>I am glad to pay copying costs of those papers. > >Pay whatever you want. You get no more information from me... > >At least not until you clear up all the misinformation you have posted here, by >answering the questions you pretend to not see below... I asked you already asked you years ago how to get a hard copy of that. Each time you just use excuses... ...excuses and excuses. Well i know the truth about you. See my post from august 2002. > >> >>>> >>>>Yes i can read assembly no problem. Yes i can read fortran code, no problem. >>>> >>> >>>Amazing. You can't seem to read anything else, "no problem". >> >>>IE the JICCA. Apparently you read an article I never wrote. CCC. Apparently >>>you read a post I never made. >>> >>>So you can "read no problem"? I think you have _big_ problems myself... >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>>You know i'm not a beginner in parallel search, i can see from your code already >>>>how well it would parallel work. >>> >>>Ah yes. You hit the nail right on the head with Crafty didn't you? No speedup >>>on a dual. Terrible speedup on a quad. Etc. So I am sure you "can see from >>>my code how well it would work." I am _way_ more experienced than you at >>>parallel search and _I_ won't claim to be able to do that... (look at someone's >>>code and accurately predict speedups.) Neither can _you_... >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>A year ago you posted you didn't have it. Now you post again you have it. >>> >>> >>>I posted, but you seem to be unable to grasp the concept. I have a printout. I >>>have _no_ source files. You can find that posted several times with the CCC >>>search engine if you want... You _know_ that. Just more of your patented brand >>>of dishonesty... >>> >>>So quit wasting time making up things I supposedly wrote but didn't, and spend >>>more time reading what I actually wrote. Your idiocy index will drop >>>markedly... >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>In short. Show the cray blitz source code. >>>> >>>>We have waited long enough for it. >>> >>> >>> >>>Show the JICCA article citation you raved on and on about in _several_ posts. >>> >>>Show the quote where I claimed that my speedup formula was good for any number >>>of processors. >>> >>>Show data to contradict the 18 opteron log files producing speedups reasonably >>>close to what my linear formula predicts. >>> >>>Show data to show that Crafty can't run effectively on NUMA boxes when it >>>appears to be doing just fine on the NUMA opteron. >>> >>>Show data to prove that Crafty is 10% slower because of the tree pointer. >>> >>>Show data to show how efficient _your_ parallel search. >>> >>>Show _anything_ in fact. You never do. >>> >>>Except of course you show lies. Fabrications. Nonesense. Dishonesty. >>> >>>You are good at showing those... >>> >>>I've shown _you_ all I intend to show. >>> >>>Now it's your turn to show me proof of some of the stupid claims you have made. >>> >>>Or it is your turn to once again run, switch subject, or hide, since you can't >>>stand real data...
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.