Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: difficult to be understood

Author: Reinhard Scharnagl

Date: 15:34:17 12/26/04

Go up one level in this thread


On December 26, 2004 at 17:51:57, Dieter Buerssner wrote:

Hi Dieter,

>Uri, you are not alone. I can hardly understand some of Reinhard's posts, when
>they are in German, even. To me it looks, like he is inventing now and then his
>own new terminoligy. He uses it, like if it was obvious to anybody (which is not
>the case). Reinhard seems to literally translate this terminology into the
>English language, which probably will make it even more difficult to understand.
>One example (only from my vague memory): Smirf erzeugt voll informierte Züge (??
>to me, but I can guess a bit, what Reinhard means) he translates to "fully
>informed moves" - which sounds even worse.
>
>Reinhard, sorry, I really do not (and do not want to) complain about your words
>and thoughts.

for me the problems you describe seem not to be avoidable, as I want to go my
own way in chess programming. But there is always an option to ask me again,
when things seem to be unclear. Imagine that I have to make similar efforts
when I try to understand the explanations of others. I am not patchworking
published computer chess program source codes. I could argue with the same
right than you for others that they would use a strange terminology, but I
don't. And probably some of my solutions might be different and need another
vocabulary.

To your example: "Smirf erzeugt voll informierte Züge" here I want to
explain, that the generated moves would include a lot of details like:

a)
- legality (only legal moves generated)
- threating check (including direction), double check or mate
- promotion info (new piece code)
- e.p. info
- capturing info (flag)
- Pawn special double move info
  (causing enabling e.p. after moving)
- castling info (including changed Fischer castling rights)
- covering the complete extended capablanca piece set and 8x8/10x8 boards
  (incl. Chancellor + Archbishop)
b)
- preevaluation with MVV/LVA, checking killer- and optimal moves
  and moreover including a slight positional change assumption
  (all provided for move ordering)

It might be helpful if you could give me hints how I should handle that problem
in a better way without suggesting me to leave my personal approach.

Regards, Reinhard.



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.