As a programmer, I can also tell you that Bison is original:
* the code itself is 100% original, there's no copy/paste from Fruit
wel,100%? The passed pawn eval part comes from fruit.
it may uses ideas from Fruit, but it is still not a copy/paste. Besides, I do find it quite different from Fruit. Can you please show me an example of passed pawn evaluation code that is so similar to Fruit ?
Besides, you do realise that the passed pawn code is not even 0.5% of the amount of code written in Bison...
lucasart wrote:...for example Strelka: it is a rewrite, but strictly following Fruit's design from A to Z, although it introdues some further improvements to the Fruit base. However, this is not as wrong as 1/, amd it is not illegal if the source code is available under the GNU GPL.
Strelka may resemble Fruit, but Strelka (version 2.0 at least) very strongly resembles Rybka 1.0 Beta and I think it was a slightly-modified reverse engineered version of Rybka 1.0 Beta. My belief is that Rybka 1.0 Beta plagarized the eval from Fruit 2.1 and then Osipov reverse-engineered that to produce Strelka.
I know Osipov has claimed that Strelka was based on Fruit rather than Rybka, but after seeing how close Strelka 2.0 and Rybka 1.0 Beta are, I don't really believe it.
When ChessWar XVI cycle ended in May, I took a 2 months break.
On the light of recent events, I asked myself whether spending time on computer chess was still worth the effort.
I finally started the Promo division of ChessWar XVII in July, and I found out I still care for computer chess. I am glad I did not give up, and I'm getting very good feedback from the participants of the Promo.
I have deleted several engines from the top division (Rybka was the first to fall). I don't want any derivative from strong open source engines anymore. Some cases are clear cut, but some other ones seem to belong to a grey area.
It's nice to have you back and nice to have ChessWar back too.
I applaud your decision to be more selective about which engines to include. I know it's not always an easy decision but it's clearly not good to be in any tournament and have to face several programs all of which are different development forks of the same program and yet not allow the same for Stockfish, Komodo and others.
When ChessWar XVI cycle ended in May, I took a 2 months break.
On the light of recent events, I asked myself whether spending time on computer chess was still worth the effort.
I finally started the Promo division of ChessWar XVII in July, and I found out I still care for computer chess. I am glad I did not give up, and I'm getting very good feedback from the participants of the Promo.
I have deleted several engines from the top division (Rybka was the first to fall). I don't want any derivative from strong open source engines anymore. Some cases are clear cut, but some other ones seem to belong to a grey area.
It's nice to have you back and nice to have ChessWar back too.
I applaud your decision to be more selective about which engines to include. I know it's not always an easy decision but it's clearly not good to be in any tournament and have to face several programs all of which are different development forks of the same program and yet not allow the same for Stockfish, Komodo and others.
Hi Don, you are welcome
Thanks for your support. As you know, I don't care much about legality. Ethics are my main concern.
