Author: Keith Kitson
Date: 09:53:26 09/02/99
Go up one level in this thread
On September 02, 1999 at 12:32:49, blass uri wrote: >I cannot change the contempt parameter of Junior,Hiarcs or crafty >to more than 200(2 pawns). > >If I try to change it to 300 the interface changes it back to 200. > >I consider it as a bug because I see no advantage of it. I understand what you are saying here, but this restriction cannot be considered to be a bug. It is a restriction in the use of the program. A bug, IMHO is a problem that has not been catered for in the code and leads to an error being performed in the program. There is no error being performed here, the program still continues to work and it is obvious from the action of the program that the author intended no greater value than 200 to be accepted in this field. The very fact that the system converts any setting higher than 200 back to a maximum of 200 indicates that a line or two of code has been entered to ensure this is done. Or a range paramter has ben set to effect the same result. What is more concerning for me is the fact that I found no guidance in the manual or in the on-line help to indicate valid values for this field. This in my opinion is an ommission and should be catered for. Just following this line of thought a little further there may be a restriction of 200 as they found the play of the program unacceptable for values above 200. This is only guess work now. It may be pertinent to email the author with your query. If your main reason for having the flexibility to adjust the contempt factor over a wider range is to weaken the program then I suggest you visit drunk, patzer or moron, the playing styles aptly match the description in m y opinion..:-)) (these by the way are handicap styles that have been pre-defined. >If they assume people usually do not mean to bigger values than 200 then they >can print a warning when someone try to change it to more than 200 but not >prevent me from doing it. > >I think the limit should be 9999 and in this case it should show evaluation of >draw only if it can prove that there is at least a draw. > >Uri
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.