Dan chess accusation solved!!!!!

[Daniel Shawul]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Daniel Shawul at 04 February 2004 05:22:03:

Hi All
This is an email approval from Dann Corbit.

DanChess is not a clone. It is crystal clear to me that Daniel Shawul
has read the crafty code. For instance, DanChess and Crafty are the
only programs that I know of that go out of the way to detect stonewall
formation:
/////////// code of the two programs is cut
However, all the implementations of crafty ideas that I saw were
symbolic in nature (that is, a transplant of ideas and never a
transplant of code).
The sudden jump in code size is due to the addition of Eugene Nalimov's
EGTB code.
The engine itself is an interesting one, with a hybrid of mailbox and
bitboard for the engine (I have never seen that combination before,
though bitboard+0x88 is not unheard of).
The data structures are always different (in some areas extremely
different). For instance, Dan does have a tree (like crafty) but it
holds much less and very different data.
My conclusion:
DanChess is not a clone.
P.S.
You will benefit greatly from a few profiler runs.
Feel free to pass my conclusions on to anyone you like. You may quote
this email in full or in part as you like.
I have informed some others who had questions about the nature of your
program of my findings.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////


Thanks Dann for your fair decision!!!!!!!
Enjoy DanChess everybody!!
regards
Daniel Shawul



DanChess

[Olivier Deville]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Olivier Deville at 04 February 2004 05:59:47:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Dan chess accusation solved!!!!! geschrieben von: / posted by: Daniel Shawul at 04 February 2004 05:22:03:

Hi All
This is an email approval from Dann Corbit.

DanChess is not a clone. It is crystal clear to me that Daniel Shawul
has read the crafty code. For instance, DanChess and Crafty are the
only programs that I know of that go out of the way to detect stonewall
formation:
/////////// code of the two programs is cut
However, all the implementations of crafty ideas that I saw were
symbolic in nature (that is, a transplant of ideas and never a
transplant of code).
The sudden jump in code size is due to the addition of Eugene Nalimov's
EGTB code.
The engine itself is an interesting one, with a hybrid of mailbox and
bitboard for the engine (I have never seen that combination before,
though bitboard+0x88 is not unheard of).
The data structures are always different (in some areas extremely
different). For instance, Dan does have a tree (like crafty) but it
holds much less and very different data.
My conclusion:
DanChess is not a clone.
P.S.
You will benefit greatly from a few profiler runs.
Feel free to pass my conclusions on to anyone you like. You may quote
this email in full or in part as you like.
I have informed some others who had questions about the nature of your
program of my findings.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Thanks Dann for your fair decision!!!!!!!
Enjoy DanChess everybody!!
regards
Daniel Shawul

Very good news, I'm happy to learn this. My feelings were that DanChess was not a clone of any sort. Keep on the good job Dan, your engine is a very promising one.
Olivier



ChessWar

[Robert Allgeuer]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Robert Allgeuer at 04 February 2004 10:21:43:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Dan chess accusation solved!!!!! geschrieben von: / posted by: Daniel Shawul at 04 February 2004 05:22:03:

Hi All
This is an email approval from Dann Corbit.

DanChess is not a clone. It is crystal clear to me that Daniel Shawul
has read the crafty code. For instance, DanChess and Crafty are the
only programs that I know of that go out of the way to detect stonewall
formation:
/////////// code of the two programs is cut
However, all the implementations of crafty ideas that I saw were
symbolic in nature (that is, a transplant of ideas and never a
transplant of code).
The sudden jump in code size is due to the addition of Eugene Nalimov's
EGTB code.
The engine itself is an interesting one, with a hybrid of mailbox and
bitboard for the engine (I have never seen that combination before,
though bitboard+0x88 is not unheard of).
The data structures are always different (in some areas extremely
different). For instance, Dan does have a tree (like crafty) but it
holds much less and very different data.
My conclusion:
DanChess is not a clone.
P.S.
You will benefit greatly from a few profiler runs.
Feel free to pass my conclusions on to anyone you like. You may quote
this email in full or in part as you like.
I have informed some others who had questions about the nature of your
program of my findings.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Thanks Dann for your fair decision!!!!!!!
Enjoy DanChess everybody!!
regards
Daniel Shawul

Where did the suspicion come from in the first place and what was the "evidence" that "supported" this suspicion?
Robert

[Slobodan R. Stojanovic]

Geschrieben von: / Posted by: Slobodan R. Stojanovic at 04 February 2004 20:13:28:
Als Antwort auf: / In reply to: Dan chess accusation solved!!!!! geschrieben von: / posted by: Daniel Shawul at 04 February 2004 05:22:03:

Hi All
This is an email approval from Dann Corbit.

DanChess is not a clone. It is crystal clear to me that Daniel Shawul
has read the crafty code. For instance, DanChess and Crafty are the
only programs that I know of that go out of the way to detect stonewall
formation:
/////////// code of the two programs is cut
However, all the implementations of crafty ideas that I saw were
symbolic in nature (that is, a transplant of ideas and never a
transplant of code).
The sudden jump in code size is due to the addition of Eugene Nalimov's
EGTB code.
The engine itself is an interesting one, with a hybrid of mailbox and
bitboard for the engine (I have never seen that combination before,
though bitboard+0x88 is not unheard of).
The data structures are always different (in some areas extremely
different). For instance, Dan does have a tree (like crafty) but it
holds much less and very different data.
My conclusion:
DanChess is not a clone.
P.S.
You will benefit greatly from a few profiler runs.
Feel free to pass my conclusions on to anyone you like. You may quote
this email in full or in part as you like.
I have informed some others who had questions about the nature of your
program of my findings.
/////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Thanks Dann for your fair decision!!!!!!!
Enjoy DanChess everybody!!
regards
Daniel Shawul