RE: [computer-go] Moyoman, a Go playing program

["Mark Boon" <tesuji@xxxxxxxxx>]

Since nobody has even come close to making a 1 dan playing program, the 100
man years and the 1 million lines of code are of course pure speculation.

But it seems rather obvious that 4-6 man years isn't going to do it. Neither
is it clear 50K whether would be enough. I agree 50K lines is a fair amount
and enough to make a fairly strong Go program, but I think it's rather
doubtful whether it will be enough to reach 1 dan. Most modern Go programs
probably already exceed the 50K lines mark, and they're still very far from
1 dan.

It seems rather old fashioned to count in number of lines nowadays anyway. A
program with hard-coded rules and/or patterns doesn't necessarily have to be
any more complex than a program using similar patterns or rules stored in a
database. Also, a framework to support the development can easily become
much bigger than 50K lines of code.

In some previous post it was saying old code is bloated. Seems rather the
wrong way around. Although old code is often less well structured and may
*seem* more bloated, it's clear modern software is much more bloated than
old software. This is not necessarily a bad thing, it basically reflects the
fact that nowadays speed of programming is more important than the
efficiency of the code. Hardware continually gets cheaper, whereas
programmers time has become rather expensive.

    Mark Boon


-----Original Message-----
From: computer-go-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:computer-go-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of chrilly
Sent: Wednesday, July 07, 2004 23:57
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Moyoman, a Go playing program


>
>1. It will take about 100 person years, or 1 million
>executable lines of code to get to amateur 1 Dan.
>
I think 4-6 man years should be sufficient for this goal. 1 full-time
programmer, one part-time go-expert and one part-time tester and one - part
time - project manag. The goal should be reachable in 2-3 years.
In the computer-chess-project Hydra I have now these ressources.I think this
is the perfect project size. In a bigger software project the productivity
per member declines rapidly due to the communication/coordination overhead.

Unfortunately I have found yet no sponsor who wants to invest this 4-6 man
years. Or to put it the other way round. Fortunately I have found a potent
sponsor for building the ultimate chess machine.

I have worked before in 1 million lines of code projects (big
telephone-system for Siemens). It is a nightmare. This amount can not be
reliable handled any more. Everyone hesitates to make changes to working
code (even if the code is bad and slow), because one can not overlook the
consequences of changes.
I also think this is the complete wrong way. I see no reason, why a
Go-Programm should be longer than 50k Lines. This is already quite big to
manage. If one needs more code, one simply has not identified the right
concepts. Adding to much knowledge results in a lot of white noise which
dominates in many positions the relevant features. One has also the problem
to make this knowledge consistent. In chess there is the law of diminishing
returns. Some basic (and usually also simple) features like e.g. mobility
contribute most to the playing strength.

Best Regards
Chrilly Donninger


_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/

_______________________________________________
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/