Author: Andreas Guettinger
Date: 14:40:47 02/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 15, 2004 at 17:28:30, martin fierz wrote: >On February 15, 2004 at 17:19:03, Andreas Guettinger wrote: >[snip] >>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. >> >>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. > >that seems to be the point why it *is* a clone. i have a SEE in my program too. >it does about that what you describe above, but yet it will look completely >different from all other functions that people have made for this purpose. for >example, i use 3 different functions, one called SEE that is called in the >beginning, which calls SEE_attack which calls SEE_defend which again calls >SEE_attack and so on until nothing is left. that's what happens when someone >like me thinks about this for a while and makes his *own* implementation. it >will not have a single line of code that is identical to crafty. most probably >the crafty implementation is much better than mine. oh well, at least i will >never have to deal with clone accusations ;-) > >cheers > martin > > > >>As far as the eval is concerned, I agree that this is private property. >> >>regards >>Andy That was the reason I asked, I also have a SEE function in my program, and I used the concept from crafty, but not a line was copied and it looks way different from the one of crafty since I don't use bitboards yet and have to get the attackers/defenders completely different. 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.