[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: computer-go: How bad are the public domain go programs?

To: computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: computer-go: How bad are the public domain go programs?
From: Daniel Bump <bump@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Thu, 4 Jan 2001 10:59:08 -0800
Cc: drd@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, gnugo@xxxxxxx
In-reply-to: <200101041817.NAA26337@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> (message from DonDailey on Thu, 4 Jan 2001 13:17:35 -0500 (EST))
References: <200101041817.NAA26337@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reply-to: computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

> How badly does  gnugo 2.6 and baduki-0.2.9  play?  Are they considered
> terrible?

> So do I have any  reason to be happy  or are these program just really
> lousy?

I'd say post one of the games before we could answer that!

GNU Go is weaker than the best commercial programs but it is
improving. The current development versions contain important
code which is absent in 2.6 and you should not judge GNU Go
by a version which is already almost a year old. Get a recent
version from:

http://www.gnu.org/software/gnugo/devel.html

As far as I know Baduki is no longer being maintained by its
author. GNU Go 2.6 can give it a 9 stone handicap and usually
win.

Daniel Bump

Follow-Ups:
- Re: computer-go: How bad are the public domain go programs?
  - From: Stuart Cracraft

References:
- computer-go: How bad are the public domain go programs?
  - From: Don Dailey

Prev by Date: computer-go: How bad are the public domain go programs?
Next by Date: Re: computer-go: Go Protocols
Previous by thread: computer-go: How bad are the public domain go programs?
Next by thread: Re: computer-go: How bad are the public domain go programs?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread