Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Obfuscation of Fafis

Author: Thomas Mayer

Date: 15:10:45 05/28/05

Go up one level in this thread

Hi Evgenii,

On May 28, 2005 at 08:02:22, Evgenii Manev wrote:

>On May 28, 2005 at 05:14:57, Matthias Gemuh wrote:
>>On May 27, 2005 at 17:21:42, Thomas Mayer wrote:
>>>Hi Alex,
>>>> Or strange legal positions like this mate in 1:
>>>> 1QqQqQq1/r6Q/Q6q/q6Q/B2q4/q6Q/k6K/1qQ1QqRb w - - 0 1
>>>> Crafty calculates in the background and gives no output, like Fafis.
>>>this one does not proof anything. The engine is simply lost in the qsearch. This
>>>happens to most engines which a) do not restrict qsearch to a specific depth
>>>(correct for most - e.g. Fritz... :) and b) do not check for input during the
>>>qsearch, which is also true for most engines.
>>>The other stuff makes one at least quite suspicious, but it's not yet fully
>>>convincing. I wonder what the other programmers think about that.
>>>Greets, Thomas
>>Hi Thomas,
>>when compiling Quark, do you obfuscate as Fafis does ?
>>Why should a hobby engine need that ?
>may be because the author has idea that his engine will go commercial?

well, even the pro's don't do it... When someone encrypts his code this is a bit
strange, combined with the other observations one really get suspicious if he
has to hide something...

Greets, Thomas

This page took 0.01 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.