On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 07:43 +0100, Heikki Levanto wrote:
My personal preference might be C, but at
work I have to learn more Java... Anyway, I don't want to start a
language
war here, not again...
Oh, you want a war :-)
Seriously, Java has it's place but if you really get serious about
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 09:48 -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
Am I being too critical of languages? I cannot find anything that
beats C (other that perhaps assembly, and I did once write a chess
program using an assembler.)
I should clarify here.It's not the language that matters, but it's
the
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 09:24 -0800, Zach Tellman wrote:
There are few languages other than these that offer reasonable
performance, not worse than 2X slower than C, but they tend
to be
memory hogs. Java is one of them. I cannot imagine every
seeing a
From: Zach Tellman [EMAIL PROTECTED]
There are few languages other than these that offer reasonable
performance, not worse than 2X slower than C, but they tend to be
memory hogs. Java is one of them. I cannot imagine ever seeing a top
chess program written in Java, or anything that is
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 10:13 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
Some language may make it easy to encapsulate information gleaned
during local searches into a kind of short term memory and exploit
that to speed up evaluation of many branches of the search tree. Who
knows? We have a long way to go
There actually were at least three operating systems written in Haskell (
House, hOp, and Kinetic ), and the Lisp Machines came with absolutely
everything - operating system, user interface, editor, yadda yadda - crafted in
Lisp.
___
Don Dailey skrev:
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 09:24 -0800, Zach Tellman wrote:
There are few languages other than these that offer reasonable
performance, not worse than 2X slower than C, but they tend
to be
memory hogs. Java is one of them. I cannot imagine
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 10:55 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
At some level, this is true; it comes down to crafting an efficient
implementation; but some languages make it easier to express some
ideas than others. For instance, some languages make it very natural
to perform operations on every
terry mcintyre wrote:
From: Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 10:13 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
Some language may make it easy to encapsulate information gleaned
during local searches into a kind of short term memory and exploit
that to speed up evaluation of many
Don Dailey skrev:
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 20:13 +0100, Dan Andersson wrote:
If one takes the position that bugs have a pretty significant impact
on
the strength of a program (A position I agree with) one could be
pretty
forgiving about the speed of execution of an algorithm if it is
written
Don Dailey wrote:
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 07:43 +0100, Heikki Levanto wrote:
My personal preference might be C, but at
work I have to learn more Java... Anyway, I don't want to start a
language
war here, not again...
Oh, you want a war :-)
Seriously, Java has it's place but if you really
Yes, I also forgot about Fortran. Before C came along the best chess
programs were written in Fortran or assembly.
I think Fortran is still one of the fastest executing languages. I
don't think Fortran is even listed in the benchmarks game but it should
be if it isn't, it's still in common
On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 09:48:35AM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
My personal preference might be C, but at
work I have to learn more Java... Anyway, I don't want to start a
language war here, not again...
Oh, you want a war :-)
Seriously, Java has it's place but if you really get serious
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 21:26 +0100, Heikki Levanto wrote:
On Tue, Nov 04, 2008 at 09:48:35AM -0500, Don Dailey wrote:
My personal preference might be C, but at
work I have to learn more Java... Anyway, I don't want to start a
language war here, not again...
Oh, you want a war :-)
From: Don Dailey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Tue, 2008-11-04 at 10:13 -0800, terry mcintyre wrote:
Some language may make it easy to encapsulate information gleaned
during local searches into a kind of short term memory and exploit
that to speed up evaluation of many branches of the search
On Mon, Nov 03, 2008 at 03:40:42PM -0800, Zach Tellman wrote:
There are a number of these floating around already, but I've noticed that
their source code tends to be somewhat opaque.
I have noticed the same. Is there a centralized list of available engines and
toolkits?
With that in mind,
16 matches
Mail list logo
