Author: Günther Simon
Date: 11:15:39 06/18/05
Go up one level in this thread
On June 18, 2005 at 14:07:32, Bryan Hofmann wrote: >On June 18, 2005 at 13:54:07, Günther Simon wrote: > >>On June 18, 2005 at 13:44:19, Bryan Hofmann wrote: >> >>>On June 18, 2005 at 13:22:58, Gabor Szots wrote: >>> >>>>On June 18, 2005 at 13:11:27, Bryan Hofmann wrote: >>>> >>>>>On June 18, 2005 at 11:30:05, Gabor Szots wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>An excerpt from the readme of the new Fruit: >>>>>> >>>>>> "added PV-node extensions (this is from Toga), e.g. extending >>>>>> recaptures only at PV nodes. Not sure if these extensions help; if >>>>>> they do, we all need to recognise Thomas Gaksch's contribution to >>>>>> the community!" >>>>>> >>>>>>In my opinion it does not matter whether they help. In my interpretation Fabien >>>>>>uses something Thomas invented or something from his code. The same what Thomas >>>>>>did (only to much less extent). >>>>>>This adds to the confusion and controversion. What do we have now: two engines >>>>>>or two personalities? Or more? Fruit 2.1 based on Toga II based on Fruit 2.0? >>>>>>Ridiculous. The whole GPL is ridiculous. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>Why, do you want to follow the teachings of only one mind. GPL uses the concept >>>>>that more then one brain is better the a single brain. >>>> >>>>Does GPL also use the concept that one code is better than starting from >>>>scratch? >>>> >>> >>>Reinventing the wheel from scratch makes no sense. >>> >>>>> >>>>>Would you call Crafty this? Crafty uses EGTB's like many other programs and that >>>>>chunk of code was written by Nalimov. >>>>> >>>> >>>>Did Nalimov write that code for his own fun only or also for use in chess >>>>programs? >>>> >>> >>>As far as I know Fabien and Thomas wrote their code for fun as there is no >>>charge for the program. There are other snippets of code in Crafty like the >>>Futility pruning that were not written by Hyatt yet I have not seen you complain >>>about this... >>> >>>>> >>>>>>Maybe Fabien intended to implement these PV-node extensions anyway. Thomas did >>>>>>it _for him_ (!) and now Fabien has to refer to Thomas otherwise he would be a >>>>>>thief! >>>>>> >>>>>>I can only recommend to all authors not to publish their source code. At least >>>>>>not if their engine plays too well. Maybe it is too late. >>>>> >>>>>There are and have been several chess engines that were written with more then >>>>>one individual involved. I fail to see any reasoning behind this statement. >>>>> >>>> >>>>Those individuals deliberately chose one another for a joint venture. >>> >>>And that is the whole point of GPL if you would just take the time to understand >>>it. >> >>Well, IMHO the last sentence seems to be a downhill pervertion ... >>If GPL would be really copy and paste without even trying to >>understand anything, something must be wrong. >> >>Guenther > >I said nothing about cut and paste. GPL is about the betterment of mankind thru >sharing of ideas and information. It has been done thru the ages and brought us >to where we are now. What is the difference between cut + paste and not even 'taking the time to understand' before using some source code? It's just the generally approach of that sentence I don't like. >Why does everyone want to make an engine vs engine a arm >wrestling match... Well I am bit fed up with that weak metaphors like 'wrestling' and 'reinventing wheels', moreover that was not my point at all. Guenther
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.