Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 23:32:00 01/31/99
Go up one level in this thread
On January 31, 1999 at 13:14:18, KarinsDad wrote: >On January 31, 1999 at 00:42:27, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>I am going to create a special opening book that uses the C.A.P. data. It will >>also contain some middlegame and endgame stuff in it, but most programs will >>have little interest in that. What I would like to know is what API would you >>like to use? I can make it a C API or C++ objects. > >I think most people would want a ANSI C api so that most any language can access >it (as per the other posters). Seems like C would work for almost everyone. Since I will publish the code also, you could make a DLL out of it and use it from Delphi, Modula II or whatever else you might like also. >> I also would like to get >>your thoughts on what the volume of information you would like back is. I will >>have a suggested move for all positions, a best move for some positions, and an >>avoid move for a few positions. I will have a pv -- how much of that would you >>like and in what format? I will have a ce. > >What is a ce? Centipawn Evaluation. You can learn all about EPD (Which is the base format of data that I am collecting) from the PGN standard. >> Would you like second guesses also >>(I have tables with the same information but did not get run as long and >>occasionally the answers are different) or best answer only? What should the >>format for the positions be? If binary rather than character string, what >>format will convey the all the information that everyone needs? I can possibly >>start up the inquiry data structure with various attributes depending upon the >>way it is constructed. I will also have an interface to update the database. >>That way, it can grow in information over time. >> >>What I would like is a clear specification that would benefit the broadest >>possible range of programmers with the greatest possible utility. > > >Although this project is interesting, I kind of see the "end of an era" with it. >Once this data is generally available, a lot of commercial programs and quite a >few amateur programs will use it. Unlike tablebases where you are not sure if a >given game will even get to them, all programs need good openings to play well. >Hence, the direction may go that instead of attempting to put in a good opening >book, a lot of programmers will be trying to find ways to "extend the C.A.P >book" (which in and of itself will be a tough thing to do). > >And those programmers who have their own opening books will find their programs >at a major disadvantage. It's kind of a shame, but I guess that is the price of >progress. Well, you can put whatever kind of smarts you want to into your inquiry. This is just a data provider. I don't think that it is ever a shame to step out from the dark into the light. And I think a real shame is when we discover a light bulb and keep it in a box so that only we can use it. >It's too bad that any opening work that I had planned will now probably go by >the wayside and I will use C.A.P., otherwise, my program will be at a major >disadvantage. I used a metaphor in r.g.c.c.: "I am standing in front of an ocean with an eyedropper in my hand." I promise to leave some seawater behind for you.
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.