RE: [computer-go] Oh no...possible language superiority storm ahead...

[Vincent Diepeveen <diep@xxxxxxxxx>]

At 21:57 8-11-2004 -0200, Mark Boon wrote:
>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: computer-go-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> [mailto:computer-go-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Vincent
>> Diepeveen
>> Sent: Monday, November 08, 2004 21:47
>> To: computer-go; computer-go
>> Subject: Re: [computer-go] Oh no...possible language superiority storm
>> ahead...
>>
>>
>> I have led several java projects. The comparisions in speed were done 2
>> weeks ago. Good programmers never say JAVA is fast. They know
>> much better.
>>
>> Note that many chess engines are coded in assembly. I remember some go
>> programs life & death searches are too.
>
>Really? I'm a bit out of touch... Go development in assembler still happened
>when I participated in tournaments. But that was more than 12 years ago. I
>didn't know it was still done.
>
>I would never say Java is faster than C. It's slower. But most development
>goes much faster in Java than in C or C++ though. I have done a lot in both.
>And for me, and especially for Go, development speed translates to
>performance gain. Maybe it's different for chess, where you need to
>experiment less because it's already known *what* you need to program. If
>you know exactly *what* needs to be done, obviously assembler is fastest
>still.

It sure is true that most chess engines hardly change a byte. However you
shouldn't compare JAVA to pure C only but to C++ when you want interface
functionality.

How big is your code size now in JAVA.

Let's compare that to ours.

just my textmode engine is 2.2 MB source code. I write with short variable
names and don't write much comments. That's not including the interface as
3 people contribute to that, and we have our own 3d engine, so not fair to
compare that.

what i don't understand is why you say it codes easier. i do not understand
a penny from that. go is just like chess. nothing different from
programming viewpoint.

you have certain databases, i have EGTBs for that. It needs to stream
petabytes to generate new 6 men.

you have no openings book problems, i do.

you can load in GUI at most 500k games or so.

We are at 5 million.

And so on. It's just a dimension bigger a chessprogram.

>_______________________________________________
>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/