Author: Uri Blass
Date: 10:59:29 02/16/04
Go up one level in this thread
On February 16, 2004 at 13:51:35, Dann Corbit wrote: >On February 16, 2004 at 13:38:50, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>On February 16, 2004 at 13:22:56, Uri Blass wrote: >[snip] >>>It is important to make things clear because Dann Corbit in the winboard forum >>>even suggested that it may be a bad idea to read crafty's code >> >>This doesn't make much sense to me. I can't imagine a better way to learn about >>the insides of a chess program than to look at the source, particularly when the >>program is written like Crafty with about a 50-50 ratio of instructions to >>comments. If borrowing ideas was bad, then he might be right. But you can look >>at a program without borrowing source... > >If you are not allowed to apply what you learn, what is the purpose of reading >it? If you already started from a different data structure than Crafty then applying what you learn will usually result in a different code. If you start from almost the same structure of crafty then you are in a problem and Bob explain that he used the the order of bits in bitboards in Crafty is not natural to use for a new bitboard program. Uri
This page took 0.01 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.