Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Viability of Linux as Chess Platform

Author: Don Dailey

Date: 19:56:21 07/20/99

Go up one level in this thread


On July 20, 1999 at 17:58:34, Robert Pawlak wrote:

>I'd be interested to hear what some of the people directly involved with the
>development of chess software think about Linux.
>
>Specifically, do you think that it is now/will be a platform worth developing
>for. From a layman's standpoint, I would think that it would not be too
>difficult to port an engine written in ANSI C over to Linux, then use Tkl or
>something like it to build an interface.
>
>Also, do you think that the development tools are sufficiently mature to
>undertake something like this?
>
>But, I realize that not all engines are coded in C... As a side question, what
>is the percentage of chess engines coded in C, and in assembler?
>
>Bob P.

I have been considering the question from the completely opposite point of
view, is Windows a viable platform for chess program development?  We have
developed everything here in unix (and linux) and I think it's a complete
non issue, you can write a program for either OS and it should be just fine.

I cannot think of anything  that makes a difference.  Unix is a lot more
robust and stable, almost all our unix machines have run for months without
a reboot,  I don't think there has ever been a windows machine that can
do this.  But this has little to do with writing a strong chess program.

You can probably get a million different opinions on this subject but
I would just use whatever platform you are most comfortable with.  We
are working with both windows and unix (linux included) and we do our
any serious testing and development on unix, it's simply a whole lot
more reliable and definitely more stable.  Remember, unix has been around
forever, Windows is realatively new and still quite buggy but this will
improve.  One big advantage of using a linux machine is that you can
be sure you won't have to reboot it, it will run for weeks or months
without a reboot being needed.   This is still a big problem even on
an NT machine.

Some of our developers here at MIT won't develop on a windows machine
and believe the multitasking is still very weak.  The issue is having
lots of jobs running simultaneously with lots of windows up and running.
They tell me windows gets very slow and unhappy when you try to do
more than one or two thing at a time.  I have read a lot of stuff that
claims windows is fine in this area, so I don't really know if this is
a problem.  But I know it's NOT a problem on a unix machine.

Don't forget that a lot of fine programs are developed on either platform.
I think Bob Hyatt does most of his Crafty work on linux.  So I really don't
think this is an OS issue.

Another reason why we develop on UNIX is simply that the big machines
in the world are unix machines.  I don't know of any 500 processor
NT machines and I want my program to be able to run on any machine
that becomes available to us.  I don't really consider windows a
viable platform for WHAT WE DO for this very reason.  Windows is getting
a lot better, but we still consider it small potatoes and not really
a serious platform for the kind of research we do.  But then the
departement I work in is called "supercomputing technologies."

- Don



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.