Author: Günther Simon
Date: 11:56:23 01/17/06
Go up one level in this thread
On January 17, 2006 at 14:43:01, Keith Hyams wrote: >It seems to me to be simply a matter of being open and applying common sense. > > If you use substantial parts of Fruit's evaluation, whether or not you change >the names of the variables, then you must acknowledge the fact and let others >decide whether or not you have made a clone. If you are not open you risk being >accused of deceit. Others make the decision. > >If you read Fruit's code and use some of the ideas then again acknowledge the >fact and let others decide. Mr Rajlich acknowledged the fact that he thoroughly >studied Fruit and he even states that he probably gained 20-30 Elo by doing so. >He allows others to decide. So far nobody has claimed that Rybka is a Fruit >clone. That's distorting the truth so. There is and never was something wrong in studying the ideas in a source and implement them in an own way, if they work at all in another programs structure! This has nada to do with the cloning we talk about here. This cloning is just 1:1 copying parts parts of given source or translating it into another language. Guenther >There are no grey areas for an author to worry about – he merely has to state >what he has done and let other people decide. > > Keith
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.