Author: Gerd Isenberg
Date: 23:17:49 08/23/04
Go up one level in this thread
On August 23, 2004 at 23:45:00, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On August 23, 2004 at 20:29:15, Gerd Isenberg wrote: > >>On August 23, 2004 at 17:41:38, Matthias Gemuh wrote: >> >>> >>> >>>> >>>>Such "standard" code like NextMove is IMHO not sufficent to proof El Chinito as >>>>Crafty clone. Did i missed something? >>>> >>>>BTW. Is it legal to disassembly others executables? >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>>Hi Gerd, >>>Is "such standard code like NextMove" also implemented the same way in your >>>engine, IsiChess ? Are the Crafty evaluation functions in ElChinito also >>>standard and in IsiChess ? Are the reported Crafty bugs in ElChinito also >>>standard and present in IsiChess ? >> >>That IsiChess has a complete other movegen does not proof, that El Chinitos >>getMove is a copy of Crafty, even if it is likely, due to the other point with >>eval and the 99999 compare. >> >>I admit that i copied some source code here from CCC via clipboard into my >>program, for instance kogge-stone algorithms. The same might be true for others, >>and the intention i and others post source-code here is to share it and to get a >>feedback, improvements and other ideas. >> >>Is Crafty's getMove-code really so unique and some code snippets got never >>posted here? If i implement some quicksort from some published pseudo code, it >>is not unlikely that i get the same assembly, despite other identifiers. > >That's a poor argument, often tried on me by students. It doesn't fly. A >bubblesort or quicksort or heapsort written by two different people might look >the same for bubblesort (10 lines of code) but _definitely_ not for quick/heap >sort. NextMove() is over 250 lines of code. The chances of two people writing >two programs independently, and having them produce the _same_ assembly, is so >close to zero that IEEE FP would store it as zero. Ok, i was totally wrong. My apologies. Gerd > >It really is a vanishingly small probability. So, beyond a doubt, things were >copied. How much is unknown at present. But it looks to be a large part of the >"chess kernel". IE evaluate, move generation and selection, and who knows what >else at present. Numbering the bits backward for the PC. Copying useless bits >of code that do nothing except wave a red flag. All of this looks suspect. >We'll see whether it has an explanation that is believable or not. > > >> >> >>>You create the impression that the ElChinito guy is the one doing the right >>>thing and Paul H. is rightly to be blamed for his catch-cloner efforts. >>>Sorry, but I don't share your strange opinion. >> >> >>For what reason does one disassembly other chess programs? >>Was there a beginning suspicion with El Chinito? >> >>Gerd > > >Probably "curiosity". Same thing that led people to ask me to investigate Le >Petite and Voyager a few years back... > > > > > >> >>> >>>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.