Author: Lance Perkins
Date: 08:14:13 08/23/04
Go up one level in this thread
You don't need to disassemble the Crafty code. You already have the source code in C. You only need to disassemble the ElChinito exe file. Paul has posted that for us too. All that's left is to compare the two. Look at the Crafty C code and determine if that will get translated to the assemlby file from ElChinito. Read Bob's post, where he himself has agreed that the analysis is correct. I have done compiler backends before, so looking at this kind of stuff is easy for me. And yup, Bob and Paul are correct. On August 23, 2004 at 11:06:07, Ulrich Tuerke wrote: >On August 23, 2004 at 10:51:37, Tony Werten wrote: > >>On August 23, 2004 at 10:48:44, Tony Werten wrote: >> >>>On August 23, 2004 at 10:06:27, Peter Berger wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>On August 23, 2004 at 09:34:06, Rolf Tueschen wrote: >>>> >>>>>So, what you here basically miss is this: in an expert environment something has >>>>>been proven and we have one or two who can't believe it, also because they don't >>>>>understand what Paul had discovered. >>>> >>>>But that's exactly the "problem", Rolf. For example you don't understand the >>>>potential proof either, but it would not be reasonable if someone were >>>>disappointed about it IMHO, which was my point. You are right that there are >>>>others who can, but those who can't, can't judge, other than choosing to believe >>>>in conclusions others reached. The only thing an ordinary user can do is look if >>>>the statements themselves seem to make sense and sound logical, but you can't >>>>evaluate the assembler statements e.g., and if tomorrow someone else posted >>>>another explanation which is coherent, you wouldn't know who is right. So a >>>>baseless accuse and a perfect proof will look alike to you too - q.e.d. >>> >>>I guess that's why they have expert witnesses in court. They find somebody who >>>does know and believe him. >>> >>>Of several experts claim something, then you can't defend yourself anymore with >>>"I don't believe it because I don't know anything about it", you'll have to come >>>up with oposite prove. >>> >>>Being somewhat experienced with programming, I can tell you: "Code was copied." >> >>Oops, just found the 1 exception: "... If the 2 programs compared were Crafty en >>Chinito" > >I think that's the point. > >In order to really confirm Paul's analysis (which seems quite convincing so >far), you would have to disassemble Crafty and Chinito yourself. You'd have to >identify the code sections which correspond to each other. Finally, you'd have >to verify that the bugs mentioned by Paul are really present in both sections. > >I am afraid that this may be a quite tedious task. Who is willing to do this ? > >Just believing Paul may be a bit too simple in view of the severity of his >conclusions. > >Uli > >> >>Tony >> >>> >>>Tony
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.