Re: computer-go: Most simple Go rules

[Nick Wedd <nick@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In message <20010625112933.A9660@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
John Tromp <tromp@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes

>Nick also said implementing superko is difficult. On the contrary, it is
>next to trivial, especially when compared with all the other things that
>need to go into a go program. (maintain a table of 64bit hashes of previous
>positions).

I was wrong, implementing superko is not difficult.  What is difficult
is persuading all the entrants in an event to implement it correctly.

There is one Go programmer who has his board labelled sideways, with
letters up the side and numbers from left to right.  This causes
confusion when the Go Modem Protocol breaks down and the programmers
have to copy moves from one screen to the other.  I have repeatedly
tried and failed to persuade him to label it correctly.
    If I can't get people to do something as easy as displaying the
right text labels on the screen, I have little hope of getting them to
implement Zobrist hashing.

>You don't want to deal with the headache of 2 programs playing infinitely
>in a triple ko. If a programmer thinks triple kos are too rare to bother
>with, then (s)he is free not to implement superko and risk a loss.

That's not a headache.  Once they have been round the loop a few times,
I say "Game over.  Half a win each."

>I think forfeiting programs that don't accept a suicide may also be a good
>idea, since it fosters an mentality of making go programs more robust and
>able to cope easily with slight rule changes.

This is necessary in Ing events, where the sponsor's rules say suicide
is to be allowed.  The evidence shows that the "fostering" is
ineffective.

Nick
-- 
Nick Wedd