Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Chess programming and lisp

Author: James Swafford

Date: 09:57:47 01/21/06

Go up one level in this thread


On January 21, 2006 at 12:45:04, Tord Romstad wrote:

>On January 21, 2006 at 11:49:03, James Swafford wrote:
>
>>On January 21, 2006 at 02:02:25, Dann Corbit wrote:
>>
>>>Who wants a chess engine consisting almost entirely of parenthesis?
>>
>>Surely you can do better than "the syntax sucks."
>
>I am pretty sure Dann was joking.  A similar joke about
>C would be to say that nobody would want a chess engine
>consisting almost entirely of semicolons, asterisks and
>curly braces.

Maybe he was... but I'm not so sure. :)  Either way after
rereading what I wrote it sounds harsher than what I meant.

>
>Most experienced Lispers consider the syntax to be one
>of the major *strengths* of Lisp, by the way.  There has
>been a few attempts to construct Lisp dialects with a more
>mainstream syntax (Dylan is probably the most widespread
>these days), but they have never caught on.
>
>>Another con: nobody wants to write an entire engine in a functional
>>style.  I don't think the model fits very well for chess engines.
>>I'd much rather write the framework in an imperative way (I like OO),
>>and possibly construct some algorithms here and there in a functional
>>style.
>
>This is a very common misconception:  Unlike Haskell, Lisp is not a
>functional language, but a multi-paradigm language.  It supports
>functional programming, but also imperative programming,
>object-oriented programming and declarative programming,
>and is not heavily biased towards either of them.  In fact, many
>Lisp programmers consider using functional programming
>where more straightforward approaches are possible to be very
>poor style.

This I didn't know!  I did know that Lisp was not purely functional
(Haskell is), but I didn't know it was multi-paradigm.
Many programmers from the functional camp don't like Standard-ML
because it has allowed imperative aspects to "pollute" the language.
I wonder how much more they dislike Lisp. :)

Anyway, thanks for the info.   I learn something every day.

--
James


>
>Most large-scale industrial Lisp programs are programmed in
>a heavily object-oriented style.
>
>Tord



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.