jdart wrote:I think lack of distance to mate is a significant limitation, although how important it is in practice is not clear.
My understanding is Bruce Moreland did a cleanroom implementation of tablebase code for Ferret that didn't depend on Nalimov's code. So that's not impossible but it would be a difficult task.
--Jon
Wrote their own tablebase code:
Thompson
Edwards
Stiller
Nalimov
Antonelli
Heinz
Shawul
Morozov
de Konig
Konoval/Bourzutschky
Meyer-Kahlen
Yankovich
Probably others too (I guess that I missed as many as I know about).
There are plenty of bitbase formats as well.
jdart wrote:I think lack of distance to mate is a significant limitation, although how important it is in practice is not clear.
My understanding is Bruce Moreland did a cleanroom implementation of tablebase code for Ferret that didn't depend on Nalimov's code. So that's not impossible but it would be a difficult task.
--Jon
Wrote their own tablebase code:
Thompson
Edwards
Stiller
Nalimov
Antonelli
Heinz
Shawul
Morozov
de Konig
Konoval/Bourzutschky
Meyer-Kahlen
Yankovich
Probably others too (I guess that I missed as many as I know about).
There are plenty of bitbase formats as well.
Gaviota!!!
Stay tuned... I just ported it to windows successfully, so a release is imminent. I will come with its own generator. I know that many won't like to fill their HD with yet another bunch of Gb of files, but it is there for the addicts
Miguel
PS: I am getting addicted to fix warnings given by splint. It is like busting bubble wrap. I think I should stop it...
Marek Soszynski wrote:I just want to bemoan the lack of up-to-date engines with the latest features.
How many current engines are multi-processor, 64-bit, fully UCI-compliant (such that they can be used for IDeA in Aquarium) and use Nalimov tablebases?
I know of only four: Rybka, Naum, Shredder, and StockFish.
Four!
Perhaps one of the Togas, but which?
Any others?
HIARCS - not currently 64-bit
Onno - not yet mp
Zappa, Junior - not fully UCI
Fritz, Crafty - opposed to UCI
Perhaps you are not using a full featured GUI that supports Winboard
What is IDeA anyway?
I do not consider an engine that supports Nalimov a point to consider it to be "full featured". IMO, a full featured engine would have their _own_ tablebases as well as their _own_ book processing, creation, and usage.
Miguel
Imagine, if you will, 5000 chess engines (I have more than that), each with a full complement of 7 man tablebase files.
I think I'll have to pulverize the entire mantle of the earth to get enough silicon and iron oxide.
*MY* preference would be a single, open source, BSD licensed tablebase format that every sensible engine on earth would use. We would all then chuck the engines that used proprietary formats such as 'Nalimov' and 'Feg' etc.
Now, if you want to roll your own, that's great. But think of the impact on end users if you ever intend to distribute your tool set.
Oops I saw this post after I answer another one.
I know and I understand what you say. But I did it for me... This is just a hobby. I do not pretend that Gaviota users will generate the TBs, and in fact, it may make not much sense. Anyway, do you think that I should release my tablebase code with a BSD license?
Dann Corbit wrote:*MY* preference would be a single, open source, BSD licensed tablebase format that every sensible engine on earth would use. We would all then chuck the engines that used proprietary formats such as 'Nalimov' and 'Feg' etc.
Could not agree with you more, quite frankly I can't comprehend how this hasn't happened already, seems so logical.
