TalkChess.com

zamar wrote: I'm only a novice chess programmer and trying to learn this great art!

That is probably why you chose Glaurung as your tool to start with. Learning mini max and so on.

zamar wrote: I chose Glaurung, because, as many have already pointed out, codebase is extremely readable and simple.

My bad. But in that case I know some programs which are far more readable and simple still!

zamar wrote: I have so many real life activities that I have neither time nor motivation to start from scratch.

Tough luck. I have so many activities I have no time to build a house. Hope it won't rain.

zamar wrote: You need independent people to test them. And the best way to get needed publicity is make a little release.

By your judgement, their testingtime is better spent on your work then the hundreds of original engines that wait months after a release before they see some public testing? Then your act is pure generosity indeed.

zamar wrote: troll-thread
Did you read my post when I published Smaug 2.2.1?

Yes, trolling can be fun once in a while, but you know that.

zamar wrote: So it's unlikely there will ever be Smaug 2.2.2

2.2.2 ? Do you have a changelog of your other 221 versions?

Tord Romstad wrote: In Norway, we say:

Whoever says "BigLion 2.23x", must also say "BigLion 2.24".

There should be more BigLion versions in the future, too.

Tord

Hi Tord,

I am working on BigLion 2.23y
BigLion 2.24 ? Let's not skip BigLion 2.23z either !.

Now that your engine is at peak of standard chess, what is your next move ?
If you ever take up 10x8 chess, your fans would lose interest in standard chess and move on to 10x8.
In the whole history of chess, no single person has ever had a better chance of shaping the chess world.
If I were your age, and had your chess programming talent, I would first release a 10x8 chess engine, and then decide whether it was right to do so

Regards,
Matthias.

Matthias Gemuh wrote:

zamar wrote: However if I had known how actively Marco is developing Stockfish, I had rather sent patches to him privately (and CC:ed tord) instead of releasing "a new engine" So it's unlikely there will ever be Smaug 2.2.2

I've spoken, so please continue

A german proverb says:
Whoever says "A", must also say "B".

So you shall release more versions, perhaps named differently.
Feel free to do so.

Matthias.

True. A lot of name from Lord of the Ring is still not used yet. What about Bilbo, or Frodo, or Sauron? All of them should make engine origin clear. Personally I think Gollum is the best name.

Peter Aloysius wrote:

Matthias Gemuh wrote:The tone in this thread has changed
People are now suddenly serious

Matthias.

Yeah, where's Chris? Nobody here can be as good as him in sarcasm and humour.

I'm busy reverse engineering Petir so I can compile a Mac (note...copyright Scotland Inc.) version for Tord.



We are going to put this to bed once and for all in a different thread called "Derivatives" in which we would like all authors to contribute their thoughts, ideas and thereby reach a compromise that can be adopted by all derivative makers, and tournament organisers.

Just need to finish this disassembly first of course...

Christopher

Christopher Conkie wrote:

Peter Aloysius wrote:

Matthias Gemuh wrote:The tone in this thread has changed
People are now suddenly serious

Matthias.

Yeah, where's Chris? Nobody here can be as good as him in sarcasm and humour.

I'm busy reverse engineering Petir so I can compile a Mac (note...copyright Scotland Inc.) version for Tord.



We are going to put this to bed once and for all in a different thread called "Derivatives" in which we would like all authors to contribute their thoughts, ideas and thereby reach a compromise that can be adopted by all derivative makers, and tournament organisers.

Just need to finish this disassembly first of course...

Christopher

BTW It's called MacPetir. Welcome to the Clan.



Christopher

Christopher Conkie wrote:

Christopher Conkie wrote:

Peter Aloysius wrote:

Matthias Gemuh wrote:The tone in this thread has changed
People are now suddenly serious

Matthias.

Yeah, where's Chris? Nobody here can be as good as him in sarcasm and humour.

I'm busy reverse engineering Petir so I can compile a Mac (note...copyright Scotland Inc.) version for Tord.



We are going to put this to bed once and for all in a different thread called "Derivatives" in which we would like all authors to contribute their thoughts, ideas and thereby reach a compromise that can be adopted by all derivative makers, and tournament organisers.

Just need to finish this disassembly first of course...

Christopher

BTW It's called MacPetir. Welcome to the Clan.



Christopher

Great ! I'll be waiting for the result.

And because the word "C* you know what" already forbidden in this forum, nobody can prove that MacPetir is actually a Petir clone.

Stan Arts wrote: And when it comes to testing, you are "wasting" testing time which you could of used for honest engines. Want to test "derivatives"? Fine, keep it to yourself.

I reserve the right to test legal derivatives if I choose, just like anybody else has that right also.
I've tested almost all original engines stronger than 2000 elo reasonably extensively, including many of the 600+ games in the CCRL 40/40 list that Neurosis has (not that we've ever been thanked for those as far as I can recall).
Of course I much prefer original engines.

Graham Banks wrote:

Stan Arts wrote: And when it comes to testing, you are "wasting" testing time which you could of used for honest engines. Want to test "derivatives"? Fine, keep it to yourself.

I reserve the right to test legal derivatives if I choose, just like anybody else has that right also.
I've tested almost all original engines stronger than 2000 elo reasonably extensively, including many of the 600+ games in the CCRL 40/40 list that Neurosis has (not that we've ever been thanked for those as far as I can recall).
Of course I much prefer original engines.

No one is saying you can't test them. What useful purpose it has is quite another question.

It is your electricity bill.



Christopher

Christopher Conkie wrote:

Graham Banks wrote:

Stan Arts wrote: And when it comes to testing, you are "wasting" testing time which you could of used for honest engines. Want to test "derivatives"? Fine, keep it to yourself.

I reserve the right to test legal derivatives if I choose, just like anybody else has that right also.
I've tested almost all original engines stronger than 2000 elo reasonably extensively, including many of the 600+ games in the CCRL 40/40 list that Neurosis has (not that we've ever been thanked for those as far as I can recall).
Of course I much prefer original engines.

No one is saying you can't test them. What useful purpose it has is quite another question.

It is your electricity bill.



Christopher

Indeed.
Remember I waste my time testing Chessmaster settings too, but I enjoy it. It's a hobby for me and it is essentially about having fun.

Graham Banks wrote:

Christopher Conkie wrote:

Graham Banks wrote:

Stan Arts wrote: And when it comes to testing, you are "wasting" testing time which you could of used for honest engines. Want to test "derivatives"? Fine, keep it to yourself.

I reserve the right to test legal derivatives if I choose, just like anybody else has that right also.
I've tested almost all original engines stronger than 2000 elo reasonably extensively, including many of the 600+ games in the CCRL 40/40 list that Neurosis has (not that we've ever been thanked for those as far as I can recall).
Of course I much prefer original engines.

No one is saying you can't test them. What useful purpose it has is quite another question.

It is your electricity bill.



Christopher

Indeed.
Remember I waste my time testing Chessmaster settings too, but I enjoy it. It's a hobby for me and it is essentially about having fun.

No one is renaming The King just because a few settings get tweaked.

Christopher