Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 15:15:18 10/18/05
Go up one level in this thread
On October 18, 2005 at 17:49:50, Mark R. Anderson wrote: >On October 18, 2005 at 15:24:52, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On October 18, 2005 at 15:10:36, Mark R. Anderson wrote: >> >>>CCC Friends, >>> >>>I have heard that Toga is a Fruit clone. I presume this was done with the >>>permission of the author, when Fruit was a free engine. So, what is the >>>difference in style and capabilities between Fruit and Toga? Is Toga a >>>"tweaked" Fruit, like Uri's Fruit version? >>> >>>What makes Toga separate from Fruit? I know from experience that Toga is a good >>>and strong engine, but the engine it was based on, Fruit, is really a top >>>engine, so one would expect that. So, I am wondering, why should I have Toga on >>>my hard drive, if I have a much improved version of the engine it was derived >>>from (Fruit 2.2). I mean no disrespect to the creator of Toga ... I am just >>>curious. I have Hiarcs 9, 8, 7, etc, and also Fritz 8, 7, 6, 5, but I only >>>tend to really play and analyze with the latest versions. So, what has Toga got >>>that Fruit doesn't? Does it have a different playing style, or is it just >>>perhaps Fruit 2.1+? >>> >>>Thanks for any comments or insight. >> >>The license of Fruit 2.1 and earlier clearly allowed GPL modifications of the >>source code. >> >>Hence, there is no problem with the existance of "clones" as long as they >>publish the modified source code. >> >>Thomas Gaksch has made some small changes to the source code that result in >>different play. From the data I have seen, Toga II 1.0 is stronger than Fruit >>2.1 but not as strong as Fruit 2.2. >> >>At any rate, it will play a bit differently than Fruit does. >> >>If you want to know exactly what has been changed, you can do diffs on the >>source trees. I believe that Mr. Gaksch has also added one new file. > >Dann, > >Thanks for the info. How about playing style? I do not know a clear definition of playing style. If I did know such a definition, I probably would not be competent enough to comment on it. >Tactical strength? Very strong -- about as strong as most professional programs >Endgame? No EGTB or Bitbase files, so it will probably make some endgame mistakes (actually, I have watched it do so). Not enough to make a significant difference in playing strength. But I would not use Toga II for endgame analysis. >That's more like what I mean. > >Mark
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.