Author: rasjid chan
Date: 22:49:31 08/20/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 21, 2005 at 01:28:45, Roger D Davis wrote: >On August 21, 2005 at 00:06:30, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On August 20, 2005 at 22:57:18, Roger D Davis wrote: >> >>>On August 20, 2005 at 22:06:24, Uri Blass wrote: >>> >>>>Suppose that somebody look at some public source code and decide to write code >>>>that does the same algorithm but with different data structure so he cannot use >>>>copy and paste for chess tasks. >>>> >>>>Do you think that the program is a clone or use code of another programmer? >>>>Do you think that the programmer should not be allowed to participate in >>>>tournaments? >>>> >>>>Note that my opinion is that the programmer should be allowed to participate >>>>because copying ideas unlike copying code is allowed but before even considering >>>>to try this idea(I am not sure if I will try it even if it is allowed) I prefer >>>>to ask this question. >>>> >>>>Uri >>> >>>IMHO, clones are code-based, not idea-based. The A-B search was somebody's idea, >>>right? If so, then we're all clones, yes? >>> >>>Even cutting and pasting of code may not be cloning if the code is already in >>>widespread use (e.g., EGTB code), or if an algorithm is known to be optimized, >>>so that any modification would be inferior. >>> >>>Conversely, cutting and pasting code that operationalizes an obscure idea in a >>>good way is the epitomy of cloning. >>> >>>Roger >> >>Thanks for your opinion. >> >>The main problem that I see is that doing the same thing with different data >>structure may also mean using the same evaluation weights and I am not sure >>if it is allowed. >> >>Part of the ideas in chess programs are about choosing correct weights and not >>only about what to evaluate. >> >>Uri > >IMHO, If it's the same idea implemented in the same way, but with a different >data structure that requires modification of the code, but the same evaluation >weights...then the answer that people give is likely to depend on > >1) the amount of code used >2) the significance of the code in the context of the total program. That is, >how much does the code determine the total behavior of the program? > >This leads to four possibilities: > >1) lots of similar code, very significant to total behavior of the program. >Likely Judgement: Obviously a Clone. > >2) lots of similar code, insigificant for total behavior of the program. >Likely Judgement: Not a clone. An example would be some extension that requires >many lines of code, and coded in a similar way...just having similar code for an >extension does not make a program a clone. The extension may not get triggered >often, for example. > >3) A small amount of similar code, very significant for the total behavior of >the program. >Likely judgement: Not a clone, since the amount of code is very small. >But...others might have other ideas here. > >4. A small amount of similar code, insignificant for total behavior of the >program. >Judgement: Obviously not a clone. > > >As the similarity of the code decreases, as the length of the code used >decreases, and as the significance of that code in the total behavior of the >program decreases, and as the extent to which the code is already in widespread >use increases (eg. EGTB code) ...the probability of a program being judged a >clone decreases. > >Roger
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.