Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:02:14 08/30/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 30, 1999 at 04:42:33, Frank Quisinsky wrote: >On August 30, 1999 at 00:44:49, Will Singleton wrote: > >>Frank, >> >>I think the best thing to do, under the circumstances, would be to remove >>Voyager from the tournament. The other results are of much interest, but >>credibility is not enhanced when a clone is knowingly included. >> >>Will > >Will, > >when I writing an chess programm and see the source code from Prof. Dr. Robert >Hyatt and see that hash-tables or the winboard (not the right word) >"configuration" is OK then I writing an eMail to Bob and ask for using this >hash-tables and winboard konfiguration. > >I must writing an eMail to Bob, it is not from me. And then I will looking in >the code for hash-table and winboard configuration, looking that I can make this >better or not better. > >When I copy the complete chess program from Bob is this not my chess programm >this is an copy and this is not interesting for me, because it is not my >creation. And when I copy 50% is this not my chess programm. When I copy logic >configuration (hash-table and winboard configuration) then is this not an copy >from Bob´s crafty then is this an big help from Bob`s Crafty. > Voyager is _not_ a "50% copy". Remember that I looked at the binary executable under a microscope. It was a dead copy... who else uses procedures like Swap(), EnPrise(), EvaluatePassedPawns(), RootMoveList(), SearchRootMoves(), Option(), EVTest(), Test(), Annotate(), etc. I looked at the evaluation terms as they are in static variables... they were almost all exactly the same. Arrays like those used to evaluate outpost knights and bishops, exactly the same. Patterns to recognize pawn races, king safety, etc. All exactly the same. This wasn't a modified crafty... it was crafty. You can't modify just a few lines of code and say "Voila' new program". That was exactly what was done. Oh Yes, it also had some other well-known modules that nobody uses since nobody has a parallel search that is public except for me. Like Thread(), SearchSMP(), ThreadStop(), ThreadWait(), etc... >Why I must then all this make new when this is for an chess programm logic (my >example with hash-tables and winboard configuration). So if you want to write a new book on C programming, you can take an existing book (which is copyrighted just like Crafty is copyrighted) and change something here and there and call that a new book? > >I don´t know what Gabriele Müller make in Voyager, but I think this is not an >Crafty. > >And when this an Crafty is, this is not fair and then I understand Bob, but >Voyager is an private programm an experimentel private program. I writing many >eMails with Gabi in the last year and Gabi make an new version and writing this >is new and this is better or not better. This person working with passion on >this projekt. You've been "had" I am afraid. Feel free to email me a copy of the binary. Which is required by the copyright by the way... Because the copyright specifically says that if the source is changed, the source changes must be made public. I'll compare either source or the binary to see just how different it really is. Although I already know... > >In the tournament which I play with Christian and Kai we will play with freeware >and private programs. This is good for found errors in the games and good for >the programmer ! And I am happy when I can help ! > >The results are interesting but not so importent. >This is my last statement and I delate Voyager not from this tournament ! > >Kind regards >Frank Fine by me... you may as well include all the old crafty versions... and bionic impakt, and who knows what else... ie just make it a 'crafty' tournament.
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.