TalkChess.com

Where are all the (oft CCC predicted) extremely strong programs?

Ippolit has been public now since May 2010...more than 1.5 years.
the codebase has been translated into plain/well-known/easy to understand chess programming terms...
(i know because i did it myself...)

Why aren't there more very strong programs...(i.e. at the level of Fire, IvanHoe, Rybka4)?
Several (many) programs: Stockfish, Sjeng, Critter, and others have copied ideas/techniques from Ippolit... and some have clearly benefited from these published/notable 'computer chess programming and theory' advancements...

but what's the problem...i.e. why isn't Stockfish as strong as IvanHoe or Rybka 4>
seems that only Rybka is keeping up with the Ippolit progress...

Clearly the tech leader, the persistent innovation is via IvanHoe... ?
almost every week new, exciting, and innovative ideas emerging...!

Take Stockfish for example: obviously, getting a C++ programmer to simply re-write (optimize) Glaurung's 'cowboy-style' existing code to modern C++ standards isn't enough...although Marco's efforts here seem certainly to have been worthwhile...
and, clearly, getting a layman to meticulously optimize search and eval parameters can help...but only to a certain degree,
although Jouna certainly seems to have had some success in this area...

I ask sincerely: how hard is it to utilize ideas/code presented in Ippolit/RobboLito/IvanHoe/(Rybka??)
Is simply it beyond the grasp of of the Komodo/Stockfish, and most programmers ?

I guess so...?

kranium wrote:Where are all the (oft CCC predicted) extremely strong programs?

Ippolit has been public now since May 2010...more than 1.5 years.
the codebase has been translated into plain/well-known/easy to understand chess programming terms...
(i know because i did it myself...)

Why aren't there more very strong programs...(i.e. at the level of Fire, IvanHoe, Rybka4)?
Several (many) programs: Stockfish, Sjeng, Critter, and others have copied ideas/techniques from Ippolit... and some have clearly benefited from these published/notable 'computer chess programming and theory' advancements...

but what's the problem...i.e. why isn't Stockfish as strong as IvanHoe or Rybka 4>
seems that only Rybka is keeping up with the Ippolit progress...

Clearly the tech leader, the persistent innovation is via IvanHoe... ?
almost every week new, exciting, and innovative ideas emerging...!

Take Stockfish for example: obviously, getting a C++ programmer to simply re-write (optimize) Glaurung's 'cowboy-style' existing code to modern C++ standards isn't enough...although Marco's efforts here seem certainly to have been worthwhile...
and, clearly, getting a layman to meticulously optimize search and eval parameters can help...but only to a certain degree,
although Jouna certainly seems to have had some success in this area...

I ask sincerely: how hard is it to utilize ideas/code presented in Ippolit/RobboLito/IvanHoe/(Rybka??)
Is simply it beyond the grasp of of the Komodo/Stockfish, and most programmers ?

I guess so...?

Or, for some of us, "copying" does not lead to a very satisfying feeling?

You can follow a fool into a maze from which you can never get out....

bob wrote:

kranium wrote:Where are all the (oft CCC predicted) extremely strong programs?

Ippolit has been public now since May 2010...more than 1.5 years.
the codebase has been translated into plain/well-known/easy to understand chess programming terms...
(i know because i did it myself...)

Why aren't there more very strong programs...(i.e. at the level of Fire, IvanHoe, Rybka4)?
Several (many) programs: Stockfish, Sjeng, Critter, and others have copied ideas/techniques from Ippolit... and some have clearly benefited from these published/notable 'computer chess programming and theory' advancements...

but what's the problem...i.e. why isn't Stockfish as strong as IvanHoe or Rybka 4>
seems that only Rybka is keeping up with the Ippolit progress...

Clearly the tech leader, the persistent innovation is via IvanHoe... ?
almost every week new, exciting, and innovative ideas emerging...!

Take Stockfish for example: obviously, getting a C++ programmer to simply re-write (optimize) Glaurung's 'cowboy-style' existing code to modern C++ standards isn't enough...although Marco's efforts here seem certainly to have been worthwhile...
and, clearly, getting a layman to meticulously optimize search and eval parameters can help...but only to a certain degree,
although Jouna certainly seems to have had some success in this area...

I ask sincerely: how hard is it to utilize ideas/code presented in Ippolit/RobboLito/IvanHoe/(Rybka??)
Is simply it beyond the grasp of of the Komodo/Stockfish, and most programmers ?

I guess so...?

You can follow a fool into a maze from which you can never get out....

only if you're also a 'fool'...

kranium wrote:...Why aren't there more very strong programs...(i.e. at the level of Fire, IvanHoe, Rybka4)?
Several (many) programs: Stockfish, Sjeng, Critter, and others have copied ideas/techniques from Ippolit... and some have clearly benefited from these published/notable 'computer chess programming and theory' advancements...

But I must ask: Sjeng? Am I mistaken in believing Sjeng has been around a lot longer than Ivanhoe, the Ip family, etc? If so, then any duplication from one to the other would have been parts of Sjeng being duplicated/copied into Ivanhoe, the Ips, etc...

Curiosity Regards,

kranium wrote:

bob wrote:

kranium wrote:Where are all the (oft CCC predicted) extremely strong programs?

Ippolit has been public now since May 2010...more than 1.5 years.
the codebase has been translated into plain/well-known/easy to understand chess programming terms...
(i know because i did it myself...)

Why aren't there more very strong programs...(i.e. at the level of Fire, IvanHoe, Rybka4)?
Several (many) programs: Stockfish, Sjeng, Critter, and others have copied ideas/techniques from Ippolit... and some have clearly benefited from these published/notable 'computer chess programming and theory' advancements...

but what's the problem...i.e. why isn't Stockfish as strong as IvanHoe or Rybka 4>
seems that only Rybka is keeping up with the Ippolit progress...

Clearly the tech leader, the persistent innovation is via IvanHoe... ?
almost every week new, exciting, and innovative ideas emerging...!

Take Stockfish for example: obviously, getting a C++ programmer to simply re-write (optimize) Glaurung's 'cowboy-style' existing code to modern C++ standards isn't enough...although Marco's efforts here seem certainly to have been worthwhile...
and, clearly, getting a layman to meticulously optimize search and eval parameters can help...but only to a certain degree,
although Jouna certainly seems to have had some success in this area...

I ask sincerely: how hard is it to utilize ideas/code presented in Ippolit/RobboLito/IvanHoe/(Rybka??)
Is simply it beyond the grasp of of the Komodo/Stockfish, and most programmers ?

I guess so...?

You can follow a fool into a maze from which you can never get out....

only if you're also a 'fool'...

So what you are saying "Individuality is great, as long as we all do it together"

Dayffd wrote:

kranium wrote:...Why aren't there more very strong programs...(i.e. at the level of Fire, IvanHoe, Rybka4)?
Several (many) programs: Stockfish, Sjeng, Critter, and others have copied ideas/techniques from Ippolit... and some have clearly benefited from these published/notable 'computer chess programming and theory' advancements...

But I must ask: Sjeng? Am I mistaken in believing Sjeng has been around a lot longer than Ivanhoe, the Ip family, etc? If so, then any duplication from one to the other would have been parts of Sjeng being duplicated/copied into Ivanhoe, the Ips, etc...

Curiosity Regards,

He, along with many others... have admitted to studying Ippolit and using (taking/copying?) ideas...

Do you honestly believe there exists a programmer who is not examining Ippolit/IvanHoe source code in an effort to 'glean' whatever they can?

Yes, of course... there is one notable exception: Bob Hyatt...
the essence of 'academic purity'...he refuses to do that because he considers it 'copying' ...?
and encourages his students to write code like Hemmingway sitting at a typewriter in Cuba!

and as we all well know...only 'Crafty' is 100% original...!!
and made in the USA!

sadly enough...this is just about it's only redeeming factor.

What thoroughly unpleasant and seemingly unprovoked posts. Please go away.

zullil wrote:What thoroughly unpleasant and seemingly unprovoked posts. Please go away.

yes the truth must hurt to such a Crafty 'fan boy'...

sorry Louis,
...i'll continue to post what i want where and when i want to.

If Stockfish is not strong enough for you, you are a hard man to please.

> I ask sincerely: how hard is it to utilize ideas/code presented in Ippolit/RobboLito/IvanHoe/(Rybka??) Is simply it beyond the grasp of of the Komodo/Stockfish, and most programmers ?

There is frequently not much value in selectively adopting part of another program because all the pieces interact (eval and search in particular).

--Jon

kranium wrote:

bob wrote:

kranium wrote:Where are all the (oft CCC predicted) extremely strong programs?

Ippolit has been public now since May 2010...more than 1.5 years.
the codebase has been translated into plain/well-known/easy to understand chess programming terms...
(i know because i did it myself...)

Why aren't there more very strong programs...(i.e. at the level of Fire, IvanHoe, Rybka4)?
Several (many) programs: Stockfish, Sjeng, Critter, and others have copied ideas/techniques from Ippolit... and some have clearly benefited from these published/notable 'computer chess programming and theory' advancements...

but what's the problem...i.e. why isn't Stockfish as strong as IvanHoe or Rybka 4>
seems that only Rybka is keeping up with the Ippolit progress...

Clearly the tech leader, the persistent innovation is via IvanHoe... ?
almost every week new, exciting, and innovative ideas emerging...!

Take Stockfish for example: obviously, getting a C++ programmer to simply re-write (optimize) Glaurung's 'cowboy-style' existing code to modern C++ standards isn't enough...although Marco's efforts here seem certainly to have been worthwhile...
and, clearly, getting a layman to meticulously optimize search and eval parameters can help...but only to a certain degree,
although Jouna certainly seems to have had some success in this area...

I ask sincerely: how hard is it to utilize ideas/code presented in Ippolit/RobboLito/IvanHoe/(Rybka??)
Is simply it beyond the grasp of of the Komodo/Stockfish, and most programmers ?

I guess so...?

You can follow a fool into a maze from which you can never get out....

only if you're also a 'fool'...

Those that are just "blindly copying" would be exactly what???