Author: Stan Arts
Date: 06:51:26 08/09/05
Go up one level in this thread
Indeed. Toga = Fruit. Same program. The hard and difficult work is to write a working chessprogram in the first place. Why the "author" of Toga gets any credit at all is beyond me. (what did he do anyway?) Before Toga/Moga, they were called "cloners". Fabien's Fruit gets twice the testing done though. With different parameters. So that's good for Fabien. :) (I really should give Neurosis's sourcecode to my neighbour (and his grandma) so they'll change 3 numbers and give it a different name. After their Guineapig, or if they aren't very creative, just Guineapig-II-0.7. That way i would get some testing for Neurosis.) But it's too bad serious testers actually waste CPU on Toga/Moga type things. Stan On August 09, 2005 at 08:09:53, ERIQ wrote: >Why have both engines? Toga seems more of just a tuneup of the "legit engine" >fruit . Why not just tuneup as best you can fruit and then send info to the >"real" author, I am sure he would not object to the help. Using someone elses >code and then passing it off as a "legit engine" and even changing the name just >seems wrong to me.
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.