Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: definition of clones: Danchess an Crafty

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 14:31:10 02/15/04

Go up one level in this thread


On February 15, 2004 at 17:19:03, Andreas Guettinger wrote:

>>>You have if (color)
>>>if (whitepawns&attacks)
>>>
>>>He is using if ((tmp=Pieces[col][pawn]&attacks))
>>
>>That particular line is a bit different.  What about _all_ the others?
>>
>>IE do you think that X=X+7;
>>
>>and
>>
>>X = X + (70/10);
>>
>>are different???
>>
>>As I said, if you don't think it is a clone, that's ok by me.  The original
>>person asked +me+ and I gave an honest opinion after looking _carefully_.  Too
>>many things are the same.  A few lines here and there different don't change a
>>thing...
>>
>>
>>
>>>He has not different code for white and black in his swap function.
>>>
>>>I also see that you use p_values[(PcOnSq(target)+7) when he is using
>>>pieceV(piece(from))
>>
>>And you think that a significant difference?
>>
>>
>>>
>>>target to from is change of a varaible
>>>but +7 to not having +7 is not a change of a varaible
>>>
>>
>>I can take Swap() and fiddle with it for 30 minutes and change enough to pass
>>your test for uniqueness.  But it won't be unique or original...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Uri
>
>
>Hm, so you think that the code of his swap fonction is to similar to the one of
>crafty or do you mind that somebody uses the idea of SEE from crafty in his
>program? I don't no the code of Danchess, so I cannot judge.

I don't mind at all...

>
>But I think if somebody uses the idea, a swap function looks basically like a
>swap function. Like an alpha-beta looks like an alpha-beta.
>Determine attackers, determine defenders, sort the bunch of them add up
>swap_scores and minimax thme in the end.


The code will be different.  How to handle x-ray attacks?  Collecting all the
attackers in the right order.  Minimaxing the result.  I have seen _several_
different SEE routines over the years, including some for bitmaps.  They all do
about the same thing, but not with the same code...  or nearly the same code...




>
>As far as the eval is concerned, I agree that this is private property.
>
>regards
>Andy



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.