Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Has Thomas Gaksch become co-author of Fruit?

Author: GŁnther 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, GŁnther 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
>>>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
>>>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
>>>>>>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
>>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.
>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.


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.