Author: Uri Blass
Date: 04:30:48 08/22/05
Go up one level in this thread
On August 22, 2005 at 06:44:05, Peter Eizenhammer wrote: >Crafty re-written in whatever language you choose will still >>be crafty... > >I think that in the last case there is no agreement. > >Fabien replied me by email that based on his opinion I am free to use the ideas >but not the code verbatim(copy/paste). (Uri) > >I am absolutely sure there is agreement. >The idea, that you could call a fruit rewritten in Pascal Movie >is so ridiculous that nobody could even be aware that you would think so. I do not think that the idea is ridiculous. Note also that I do not plan to use pascal and you can be sure that default personality of movei will not identical to another program not in the search and not in the evaluation. If I decide to use the same algorithm of fruit inside the code of Movei then I will call it fruit's personality of Movei. >This cannot be what Fabien thought, and I am sure you know that, too. I do not read thinking and translating fruit to pascal is an hard process so I am not sure about the thoughts of fabien about it. It seems to me absurd if programmers who understand something cannot use it but only look at it. To summerize my opinion: 1)I am for understanding and using the knowledge you understood. 2)I am against copying without understanding. 3)usually clones are based on copying without understanding so I am against them(I cannot prove that no understanding was done but usually copy and paste of big code is not done with understanding so I am against it). 4)Copying a code to different language is almost a proof of understanding. It is not exactly a proof because in theory it is possible to start by writing a program to translate every C program to Pascal program but I know of nobody who did it so I guess that it is an extremely hard task. Uri
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.