Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: definition of clones: Danchess an Crafty

Author: Dann Corbit

Date: 12:10:46 02/15/04

Go up one level in this thread


On February 15, 2004 at 15:06:20, Bob Durrett wrote:

>On February 15, 2004 at 14:50:26, Dann Corbit wrote:
>
>>On February 15, 2004 at 14:48:29, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>>On February 15, 2004 at 14:43:06, Bob Durrett wrote:
>>>
>>>>On February 15, 2004 at 14:29:52, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>>>
>>>><snip>
>>>>
>>>>In view of the size and complexity of Crafty I wonder whether or not cloning
>>>>Crafty is really a good idea for the newbie chess programmer to get started.
>>>>
>>>>On the other hand, maybe there are parts of crafty which could be used in the
>>>>beginning so that the newbie programmer could concentrate on creating his/her
>>>>own code for the really important parts.
>>>
>>>I don't disagree.  The parts that always cause me the most concern center around
>>>the evaluation and search.  I didn't look at his search carefully at all, but I
>>>did look at the evaluation, and that has too much copied code...  There may be
>>>significant search code copied or not.  But copying either is really copying the
>>>"personality" of the program...
>>>
>>>Several have started with gnuchess, for example, but by the time they claim it
>>>as their own and distribute something, the important stuff has been re-done by
>>>the person doing the work, rather than just copied...
>>
>>This (in my view) is a far worse offense than what has happened with the
>>DanChess case.  If you use someone's entire program and then slowly modify it,
>>that is a simple crime to me.  And one with no excuses.
>
>Unless, of course, it is done with the blessing, encouragement, and consent of
>the owner of the copyrighted code.  I can see a teacher encouraging his students
>to do just that using the teacher's program.  The program, such as Crafty, could
>serve as a "test bed" for testing new position evaluation, search and other
>ideas.  The use of "test beds" is a well-known and accepted practice.

That has happened many times.  It is not difficult to ask permission.  And if
the first person says, "No!" someone else will say "Go ahead."

I am guessing that writing a chess engine completely from scratch will have the
best results (IOW -- not one single line from another program).

I am speaking of long term results -- ten years from now.  Not the quick wins.
They are irrelevant anyway.

For me the journey to the program is much more interesting than the program
itself.



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.