Give me a program that beats a dan level taking less than a week to process.
I will code it in assembler if necesary to make it efficient for a competition. (parallel if necesary) The first part difficult. The second one is just engineering. 20 minutes or 20 hours is the same in this problem. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computational_complexity_theory Last email about java/a/b/c/c++/c#/d. --- Benjamin Teuber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > To me, computer go programming means basic research > for now, as I don't > believe the existing algorithms get you very far (I > may be too > ambitious, but I cant help it..). > Thus, I would program in a way that let's me explore > everything very > fast, without caring too much about performance. > This is why I' using > Common Lisp. > > If I'd be happy with the status of the research as > it is, trying to get > as much out of it as possible for tournament > programs, I would go > Chrilly's way and use C, assembler or my own special > chip (if I could > afford it or knew some nice sheik =) > > Just my 2 cents, > Ben > > Don Dailey wrote: > > On Mon, 2006-12-04 at 19:30 -0200, Mark Boon > wrote: > > > >> The object pooling is the only thing I'd rather > do without. But for > >> speed that's not possible, unfortunately. However > it hardly affects > >> cleanliness or readability as there's not such a > big difference > >> between a constructor call and a factory call. It > does add some > >> extra > >> code, that's true. However, that's the same for > any language, also > >> low-level ones like C or assembler. I don't see > the logic why you > >> can't do in Java something that performance gurus > do in C. Just > >> because it's Java? Because it makes sense? > >> > > > > No, for me it's the total time/effort trade-off > for a given level of > > performance. > > > > If I program in C, it will take a little longer to > write the code, but > > it will run significantly faster even if I don't > do any special > > optimizations. > > > > If I program in Java and claim it is to save time, > but then I spend a > > significant amount of time trying to make it go > fast, I have spend MORE > > time than I did in C, and it's not as fast. Not > a reasonable > > trade-off. > > > > I agree that you can do some reasonable > optimizations and still have > > readable code. But avoiding object creation > doesn't seem to me like a > > natural way to use an object oriented language. > > > > But my main point is that if you claim to use Java > to save yourself > > time, but you expect to have to do a significant > amount of > > optimizations to be happy, then why bother? Just > program in C and > > don't do any optimizations and be faster with less > time invested. > > > > I think that's enough for me. I'm not going to > post any more on this > > subject because it's starting to seem stupid going > back and forth on > > this. > > > > > > - Don > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > computer-go mailing list > > computer-go@computer-go.org > > > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > computer-go mailing list > computer-go@computer-go.org > http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/ > __________________________________________________ Correo Yahoo! Espacio para todos tus mensajes, antivirus y antispam ¡gratis! ¡Abrí tu cuenta ya! - http://correo.yahoo.com.ar _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
