Author: Andrew Dados
Date: 22:30:07 02/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 12, 2000 at 23:50:18, Vincent Vega wrote: >I don’t see any other use for 90% of amateur programs than allowing their >authors to learn programming. While learning to program is a good motivation, >it appears that many experienced programmers are also creating Yet Another Chess >Program. The reason it’s such a waste of time is that most of them just use the >obvious pattern – single threaded, alpha-beta, fast searcher. Why? Because >it’s easy. But there are so many real challenges out there: big knowledge >programs, programs that play human-like, use of genetic algorithms, use of >neural nets, parallel programs, distributed programs, programs using pattern >recognition, algorithms for quantum computers, etc. that are waiting for >advances. Instead what we get is another Crafty-wannabe. Sigh. 90% of 'amateur' programmers do it to try out some ideas authors have in their mind. And 90% of programmers undertaking this waste of time realizes that neural nets, genetic alghoritms,(quantum computers?!? - how can amateur try that one?) suck when comes down to chess so they don't bother. Some pattern recognition can be found in most programs; while 'knowledge programs' are undef to me, I noticed alpha-beta can be found in 100% of programs both amateur and commercial.... My advice - try out your own.. preferably skip that boring alpha-beta crap. It's fun when you notice chess programming is one of least rewarding hobbies you can have :) -Andrew-
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.