Why not put both version on CGOS and find out?
- Don
We have at the moment 3 GUIs and each of them does not support the
protocoll.
The main GUI is from GoAhead. Its written in old Atari-Basic and according
to Peter Woitke its difficult to integrate it. ChessBase has promised a
better GUI,
New lesson learned. It depends on the rule set if something is correct or a
blunder.
So far the Go-masters told me, it does not matter, its practically the same.
Obviously its not. This is not some weired, constructed position, it really
happened and it does not look strange at all.
Chrilly
We have at the moment 3 GUIs and each of them does not support the
protocoll.
I have written a C# Prototype-GUI. But I have no time and also not much
interest to develop this further.
..
Chrilly
Hi Chrilly,
GoTraxx has a C# class that interfaces directly with CGOS. Should be fairly
On this note, does anyone know of a collection of strange/unusual SGF
files to test a parser against? I have a SGF parser written in javacc
(think object oriented lex and yacc, outputting pure java) and while
it seems fast I've not really tested it much against corner cases.
stuart
I
it's much more likely not to matter on
a real (19x19) board.
s.
--- chrilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
New lesson learned. It depends on the rule set if
something is correct or a
blunder.
So far the Go-masters told me, it does not matter,
its practically the same.
Obviously its not. This
I haven't been working on Go at all recently so here's my UI code.
It's not great. I only used it for testing and feedback. It's not
meant to look nice. Perhaps someone else can also use it.
www.fantius.com/Go.UI.rar
___
computer-go mailing list
I forgot to mention, it's C#.
On 7/12/07, Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I haven't been working on Go at all recently so here's my UI code.
It's not great. I only used it for testing and feedback. It's not
meant to look nice. Perhaps someone else can also use it.
Brian Slesinsky wrote:
And this would mean that a position where black is in trouble
would look stronger than in a random playout (due to black
playing well only for this kind of situation) which would make
it harder to tell which positions are actually good.
Or in general, an improvement
I am playing competitive tennis-table. There were for years a heated debatte
if the ball-diamater should be increased from 38 to 40mm and if the set
shall go to 11 instead of to 21. A few years ago, the decision was taken to
play with the 40mm ball to make the game slower and in turn to reduce
Hi Chrilly,
Take a look at this list, there are already maybe more than 100 posts
on this subject. While I agree with you, just don't worry, almost all
computer go games are with the same set of rules, just ignore the
rest.
Cheers,
Sylvain
2007/7/12, chrilly [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
I am playing
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 16:37 +0200, chrilly wrote:
I am playing competitive tennis-table. There were for years a heated debatte
if the ball-diamater should be increased from 38 to 40mm and if the set
shall go to 11 instead of to 21. A few years ago, the decision was taken to
play with the
On 7/12/07, chrilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why is it not possible to establish uniform rules in Go?
I'm curious... How does the rule sets affect how people play the game of
go? I personally find territory scoring more interesting. 90% of my reason
for that is because the game ends
Darren Cook wrote:
You know you can output internal data to stderr and gogui will pick it
up and show it in the shell window?
Yes; I use the stderr output feature extensively. In fact, GoGui can be
extended via customizable analyze commands via GTP, which among other things,
can display
On 7/12/07, Phil G [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But there are only two drawbacks with this approach. One, it only works as
a result of a customized GTP command. Sometimes I want it to display
debugging information data while the GTP command is still executing (or
maybe as an addition to an existing
Jason wrote:
I'd also be willing to support slight variants to SGF that use positions
such as C4 instead of wacky things that don't match the notation
everyone else uses and vary depending on the board size.
Anders Kierulf's SmartGo program has the option to use standard Go coordinates
On 7/12/07, Robert Jasiek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jason House wrote:
I personally find territory scoring more interesting. 90% of my
reason
for that is because the game ends sooner... I don't have to go filling
dame
(open spaces between chains of opposing colors).
This is for most part
On 7/12/07, Phil G [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jason wrote:
I'd also be willing to support slight variants to SGF that use positions
such as C4 instead of wacky things that don't match the notation
everyone else uses and vary depending on the board size.
Anders Kierulf's SmartGo program has
I think your table tennis analogy is not really applicable.
The rule changes in table tennis were presumably motivated
by the need to fix a real problem, and really changed the
game.
On the other hand, all the rules arguments in Go are really
only applicable to incredibly marginal, bordering
Jason House wrote:
KGS does a fine job with unfilled dame.
Any server that violates the rules during scoring does not do a fine
job. KGS violates whichever Japanese rules.
--
robert
___
computer-go mailing list
computer-go@computer-go.org
Dave Dyer wrote:
all the rules arguments in Go are really
only applicable to incredibly marginal, bordering on imaginary
situations.
Traditional Territory Scoring rules fail in the most ordinary (!)
positions of EACH game, see http://home.snafu.de/jasiek/j1989c.html
What you claim is false
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Jason
House [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
On 7/12/07, chrilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why is it not possible to establish uniform rules in Go?
I'm curious... How does the rule sets affect how people play the game
of go?
Kyu players, using full boards, aren't
Been following this tread and it has me concerned both as a beginning
player and engine developer.
I thought the rules for Go were rather simplistic when it came to scoring:
Count all eyes, and spaces owned by each player and each captured
stone counted as a point. Whoever had the most points
From discussion, it seems that there are two important tests of
unbiasedness that we can make for an improvement to playouts:
1: For any position, we should equally study what happens when either
black or white moves there. This is captured in the proverb your
opponent's good move is your good
I think your table tennis analogy is not really applicable.
The rule changes in table tennis were presumably motivated
by the need to fix a real problem, and really changed the
game.
Yes, due to the advancements in rubber technology the game become too fast.
Bumm-Bumm-Over. Furthermore the
Jesus, there are not just Japanese, Chinese rules, there are ING, AGA... I
learned today, that suicide is allowed under some rules...
I thought, Go is a well defined game with a very clear mathematical rule
set.
There are discussions in other sports too (e.g. in Table-Tennis), but
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], chrilly
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
I think your table tennis analogy is not really applicable.
The rule changes in table tennis were presumably motivated
by the need to fix a real problem, and really changed the
game.
Yes, due to the advancements in rubber
On 7/12/07, Nick Wedd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For computers special cases matter. Especially for a search based
programm. A search based programm finds every possible special case and
plays into this case, because the opponent does not prevent it.
Are there something as Universal accepted
BTW I have no idea what IGGA means, International Guild Of Glass
Artists, International Grooving and Grinding Association,
International Gomputer Games Association, is it a typo???
No, gomputers are real:
http://www.google.com/search?q=gomputer
___
- Original Message
From: Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED]
BTW I have no idea what IGGA means, International Guild Of Glass
Artists, International Grooving and Grinding Association,
International Gomputer Games Association, is it a typo???
No, gomputers are real:
On 7/12/07, Nick Wedd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Jason
House [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
On 7/12/07, chrilly [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why is it not possible to establish uniform rules in Go?
I'm curious... How does the rule sets affect how people play the game
of go?
On 7/12/07, Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, gomputers are real:
http://www.google.com/search?q=gomputer
Maybe you were joking, but did you notice that one of the hits
from that search was a URL where the spelling was not only
used _intentionally_, but also -- in a remarkable
Does Chrilly have anything to do with this project?
-Josh
On 7/12/07, Richard Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/12/07, Chris Fant [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No, gomputers are real:
http://www.google.com/search?q=gomputer
Maybe you were joking, but did you notice that one of the hits
from
For computer purposes, this is the problem:
Territorial scoring is more human-convenient, can be done without filling
the dame or removing dead stones.
But it all depends on knowing which groups are live, which dead, which in
seki. If there's a disagreement, it needs to be settled by resuming
Jason House wrote:
I mean that the
resulting marking of who's territories is who's matches what I would have
done if I stopped at that point and scored the game.
Occasionally, KGS fails here. See rec.games.go or elsewhere for details.
I don't see a way that
the game would have come out to
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 13:58 -0400, Jason House wrote:
I run some really dumb bots online that play perfectly fine blitz
games (10s/move) with Chinese rules and it still drives humans insane
because the computer doesn't stop playing. People resign won games in
endgame because they can't take
On 7/12/07, Robert Jasiek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jason House wrote:
I mean that the
resulting marking of who's territories is who's matches what I would
have
done if I stopped at that point and scored the game.
Occasionally, KGS fails here. See rec.games.go or elsewhere for details.
The biggest difference in over the board club play is the scoring procedure.
in territory scoring, prisoners are kept separate, and at the end of the
game prisoners are put back in enemy territory and regions are rearranged to
rectangles and counter. Counting is pretty fast, and the board
Does Chrilly have anything to do with this project?
-Josh
No. Up to my knowledge a student makes his Diplomarbeit (masters-thesis) on
this topic. But building such a machine is somewhat beyond a masters thesis.
The problem is: There are no funds, no money available. Generally the Univ.
Jason House wrote:
If both players
miss it because it's a more complex vulnerability, then they miss it and
the score corresponds to their expectations.
Players miss it mostly when being too lazy to make a positional
judgement shortly before the end and to verify whether KGS marks the
right
IIRC, in KGS, the players themselves mark the dead groups, and if they disagree
I suppose there
is a conflict-resolution procedure. ( haven't come across that in actual play )
When I started on KGS, I was unaware that it was the players' responsibility to
mark dead groups -
my opponent was
In message
[EMAIL PROTECTED], Jason
House [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
The key question is really if the game would have been played
differently knowing the ruleset.
Yes. In both games, a player who was mistaken about the ruleset chose a
calm solid defensive line which would have given them a
On Thu, 12 Jul 2007, chrilly wrote:
New lesson learned. It depends on the rule set if something is correct or a
blunder.
So far the Go-masters told me, it does not matter, its practically the same.
Obviously its not. This is not some weired, constructed position, it really
happened and it does
Or did you mean it is too much bother to connect with gogui while
also running your code in a debugger?
That would be great! How do you do that (without going through a
million zillion steps each time)? I use Visual Studio.
Can Visual Studio connect to a running process?
On linux you'd do
I thought the rules for Go were rather simplistic when it came to scoring:
Count all eyes, and spaces owned by each player and each captured
stone counted as a point. Whoever had the most points wins.
How does that differ from Japanese, Chinese, Korean?
Hi Josh,
Many of your recent
I didn't write this :) I'm pretty familiar with the differences in rule
sets.
David
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Robert Jasiek
Sent: Thursday, July 12, 2007 12:17 PM
To: computer-go
Subject: Re: [computer-go] Why are
New lesson learned. It depends on the rule set if something is correct
or a blunder.
So far the Go-masters told me, it does not matter, its practically the
same. Obviously its not. This is not some weired, constructed
position, it really happened and it does not look strange at all.
I
On Thu, 2007-07-12 at 08:50 -0700, Dave Dyer wrote:
On the other hand, all the rules arguments in Go are really
only applicable to incredibly marginal, bordering on imaginary
situations.
That ignores the very real problems that many beginners have trying to
understand the logic behind Japanese
-Original Message-
From: Darren Cook [EMAIL PROTECTED]
...
P.S. There is also rec.games.go, but I think people only post there when
they want to argue about something. (Disclaimer: I've not followed
rec.games.go in about 5 years, I suppose it may have mellowed since.)
48 matches
Mail list logo
