Page 2 of 14

Re:Original project

Posted: Sat Aug 29, 2009 9:39 pm
by Dr.Wael Deeb
Zach Wegner wrote:
Michael Diosi wrote:Did you look at the sourcefile ? Did you understand the code ? Did you comapre it with Toga /Fruit code ?
Did you? Protector, while it has many Fruit-like components, shares no code with it as far as I can tell from looking through a lot of it.
Just to add that Protector is almost equal in strength to StockFish 1.4 from the first quick test I run,so it must be a significant improvement....
BTW,another neglected engine is Toga The Killer,damn strong,I am currently running a big tournament on my quad machine with amazing results so far....
Dr.D

Re:Original project

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2009 8:25 am
by Michael Diosi
Yes.
It's a clone.

Re:Original project

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2009 9:18 am
by Michael Diosi
Did you try the newest very strong engine called Vegetable ? You should.

Re:Original project

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:15 am
by Michael Diosi
Sorry, the fact that Zach is saying he looke d at it found out that is not a proof either, it's a statement.


I will publish all the ncessary info at the Arena page:

http://www.playwitharena.com


soon. If this is what you want instead of Arena relevant info.

Fafis
Patriot
Oxygen
...

If you want to waste your time go on. Why don't you test the original engines form http://www.excatachess.com ?

Re:Original project

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:24 am
by Guenther
Zach Wegner wrote:
Michael Diosi wrote:Did you look at the sourcefile ? Did you understand the code ? Did you comapre it with Toga /Fruit code ?
Did you? Protector, while it has many Fruit-like components, shares no code with it as far as I can tell from looking through a lot of it.
Did you also compare with parts of Strelka, Belka, Cyclops, Cyclone and
with parts of the Glaurung/Viper/Stockfish family?

Guenther

Re:Original project

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:47 am
by Graham Banks
Michael Diosi wrote:Sorry, the fact that Zach is saying he looke d at it found out that is not a proof either, it's a statement.


I will publish all the ncessary info at the Arena page:

http://www.playwitharena.com
I'm not agreeing one way or the other at present because I'm not a programmer. However, I thought that the moderators had agreed that clone claims were not allowed in CCC without proof being posted here to back up the claim.

Cheers,
Graham.

Why ???????

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:47 am
by Sylwy
Michael Diosi wrote: Part I
You shouldn't belive those Russians...by now you should know better.
==============================================
Part II
I see you didn't understood my last sentence, but I don't wonder...

Hi !

Politics in computer chess ???
And..... an affront to me ???


Thank you !

Silvian

Re:Original project

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2009 10:59 am
by Steve B
Graham Banks wrote:
Michael Diosi wrote:Sorry, the fact that Zach is saying he looke d at it found out that is not a proof either, it's a statement.


I will publish all the ncessary info at the Arena page:

http://www.playwitharena.com
I'm not agreeing one way or the other at present because I'm not a programmer. However, I thought that the moderators had agreed that clone claims were not allowed in CCC without proof being posted here to back up the claim.

Cheers,
Graham.
well that was the philosophy of the prior mod team Graham
however we now have a new team and i am not so sure if that is now the current philosophy
i know i still feel the same way
however even the prior mod team took the position that clone accusations would not be allowed ONLY IF no debatable proof was offered with in a reasonable period of time
i guess 24 hours would be reasonable (but the time frame was never actually set in stone)
the accuser in this case seems to suggest he will offer debatable proof here so lets see if he does
if he does not then the mods will discuss the current position on clone accusations being allowed with no proof being offered

Regards
Steve

Re:Original project

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:00 am
by Zach Wegner
Guenther wrote:Did you also compare with parts of Strelka, Belka, Cyclops, Cyclone and
with parts of the Glaurung/Viper/Stockfish family?

Guenther
I haven't looked at Belka, Cyclops, or Cyclone code, but they shouldn't be too far from their respective ancestors. I'm familiar with most open source engines on the upper end of the strength spectrum, and I didn't see any _code_ that was copied from anywhere (this is from looking at the 5 or 6 most important source files, maybe the time management or something has some copied code). The algorithms are pretty similar to Fruit, but further from Fruit than most Togas. And the engine infrastructure is totally different.

Re: Why ???????

Posted: Sun Aug 30, 2009 11:38 am
by Michael Diosi
No politics, reality.
No. Reality again.

Nu-i asa ? Sau ma insel ?