back to the Komodo SMP issue

[mvk]

And, by the same token, since you have NOT shown any understanding of parallel search issues at all, you are offering absolutely ZERO useful information to anyone here. Why not let the ones that actually understand, and work with this stuff on a daily basis, do the responding???

BTW, NOTHING has been "spelled out" in any technical way at all. Absolutely nothing. Just an innuendo, or a "might be" or "could be"...

This is demonstrably false, as Sjaak is a stronger SMP program than Crafty.
And don't forget that just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it isn't useful to others.

[bob]

And, by the same token, since you have NOT shown any understanding of parallel search issues at all, you are offering absolutely ZERO useful information to anyone here. Why not let the ones that actually understand, and work with this stuff on a daily basis, do the responding???

BTW, NOTHING has been "spelled out" in any technical way at all. Absolutely nothing. Just an innuendo, or a "might be" or "could be"...

This is demonstrably false, as Sjaak is a stronger SMP program than Crafty.
And don't forget that just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it isn't useful to others.

What is demonstrably false? We are discussing Komodo's parallel search.

What does "stronger SMP implementation" mean? I doubt it gets a better speedup. So what are you talking about?

[mvk]

And, by the same token, since you have NOT shown any understanding of parallel search issues at all, you are offering absolutely ZERO useful information to anyone here. Why not let the ones that actually understand, and work with this stuff on a daily basis, do the responding???

BTW, NOTHING has been "spelled out" in any technical way at all. Absolutely nothing. Just an innuendo, or a "might be" or "could be"...

This is demonstrably false, as Sjaak is a stronger SMP program than Crafty.
And don't forget that just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it isn't useful to others.

What is demonstrably false? We are discussing Komodo's parallel search.

What does "stronger SMP implementation" mean? I doubt it gets a better speedup. So what are you talking about?

Here you go trolling again... If you want to pick a fight then bully someone else with your ways as I'm not interested in any of that.

[bob]

And, by the same token, since you have NOT shown any understanding of parallel search issues at all, you are offering absolutely ZERO useful information to anyone here. Why not let the ones that actually understand, and work with this stuff on a daily basis, do the responding???

BTW, NOTHING has been "spelled out" in any technical way at all. Absolutely nothing. Just an innuendo, or a "might be" or "could be"...

This is demonstrably false, as Sjaak is a stronger SMP program than Crafty.
And don't forget that just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it isn't useful to others.

What is demonstrably false? We are discussing Komodo's parallel search.

What does "stronger SMP implementation" mean? I doubt it gets a better speedup. So what are you talking about?

Here you go trolling again... If you want to pick a fight then bully someone else with your ways as I'm not interested in any of that.

Trolling? I asked specific, polite questions. Your terminology left a lot to be desired and your meaning was not clear. If you find that insulting, so be it. It was not the intent. I'd just like to see people write things that are clear and which don't require follow-up questions to clear up vague terminology...

For example, immediately following my statement about Komodo's search, you wrote "This is demonstrably false." What is "this"? Logically, it refers to the statement immediately preceding this. Yet there have been NO technical details discussing how someone might use part of the parallel processing power to search wider and how that would be better than gaining 1.5 plies or so by going deeper. So, what does "this" refer to?

What does "stronger SMP program" mean? Better SMP algorithm (which I doubt) or just a stronger program, period, which is irrelevant to this discussion.

Understand my questions now?

[h1a8]

And, by the same token, since you have NOT shown any understanding of parallel search issues at all, you are offering absolutely ZERO useful information to anyone here. Why not let the ones that actually understand, and work with this stuff on a daily basis, do the responding???

BTW, NOTHING has been "spelled out" in any technical way at all. Absolutely nothing. Just an innuendo, or a "might be" or "could be"...

This is demonstrably false, as Sjaak is a stronger SMP program than Crafty.
And don't forget that just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it isn't useful to others.

What is demonstrably false? We are discussing Komodo's parallel search.

What does "stronger SMP implementation" mean? I doubt it gets a better speedup. So what are you talking about?

Here you go trolling again... If you want to pick a fight then bully someone else with your ways as I'm not interested in any of that.

Trolling? I asked specific, polite questions. Your terminology left a lot to be desired and your meaning was not clear. If you find that insulting, so be it. It was not the intent. I'd just like to see people write things that are clear and which don't require follow-up questions to clear up vague terminology...

For example, immediately following my statement about Komodo's search, you wrote "This is demonstrably false." What is "this"? Logically, it refers to the statement immediately preceding this. Yet there have been NO technical details discussing how someone might use part of the parallel processing power to search wider and how that would be better than gaining 1.5 plies or so by going deeper. So, what does "this" refer to?

What does "stronger SMP program" mean? Better SMP algorithm (which I doubt) or just a stronger program, period, which is irrelevant to this discussion.

Understand my questions now?

Robert I see where you are coming from and you make fine points that I agree with. But it is not of good taste to say comments like "you obviously don't understand parallel search" to someone who has shown otherwise by utilizing it to a halfway decent degree in their own engine.
Even if you think their understanding is low (it's impossible to be non existent) then there are better ways to comment.

Think about it!

I'm just trying to mend things here as I like to read the technical discussions sometimes.

[bob]

And, by the same token, since you have NOT shown any understanding of parallel search issues at all, you are offering absolutely ZERO useful information to anyone here. Why not let the ones that actually understand, and work with this stuff on a daily basis, do the responding???

BTW, NOTHING has been "spelled out" in any technical way at all. Absolutely nothing. Just an innuendo, or a "might be" or "could be"...

This is demonstrably false, as Sjaak is a stronger SMP program than Crafty.
And don't forget that just because you don't understand something doesn't mean it isn't useful to others.

What is demonstrably false? We are discussing Komodo's parallel search.

What does "stronger SMP implementation" mean? I doubt it gets a better speedup. So what are you talking about?

Here you go trolling again... If you want to pick a fight then bully someone else with your ways as I'm not interested in any of that.

Trolling? I asked specific, polite questions. Your terminology left a lot to be desired and your meaning was not clear. If you find that insulting, so be it. It was not the intent. I'd just like to see people write things that are clear and which don't require follow-up questions to clear up vague terminology...

For example, immediately following my statement about Komodo's search, you wrote "This is demonstrably false." What is "this"? Logically, it refers to the statement immediately preceding this. Yet there have been NO technical details discussing how someone might use part of the parallel processing power to search wider and how that would be better than gaining 1.5 plies or so by going deeper. So, what does "this" refer to?

What does "stronger SMP program" mean? Better SMP algorithm (which I doubt) or just a stronger program, period, which is irrelevant to this discussion.

Understand my questions now?

Robert I see where you are coming from and you make fine points that I agree with. But it is not of good taste to say comments like "you obviously don't understand parallel search" to someone who has shown otherwise by utilizing it to a halfway decent degree in their own engine.
Even if you think their understanding is low (it's impossible to be non existent) then there are better ways to comment.

Think about it!

I'm just trying to mend things here as I like to read the technical discussions sometimes.

I'd like to see this discussion turn "technical". That's why I started it. But a couple only want to argue and not discuss anything technical at all...