Author: Andreas Guettinger
Date: 15:19:04 02/15/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 15, 2004 at 17:33:47, Robert Hyatt wrote: >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 >> > >That is the point the apparent "non-programmers" are not getting. 10 people can >write the same algorithm and the 10 codes will look nothing alike... even with >100 different authors you would not find two duplicates... There are way too >many ways to code the same algorithm. I use a for, you use a while. I use >inc/dec (++/--) you don't. I use arrays, you don't. The differences go on and >on and on, just like that damned rabbit... > > > >> >> >>>As far as the eval is concerned, I agree that this is private property. >>> >>>regards >>>Andy What I (and from the posts a lot of others) were not getting is that you meant copy&paste with: "I think too much was taken directly from the crafty source to call this an original program." I can see clearly now the rain has gone. Please do not forget that most of the people following the discussion here have not seen the code. 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.