I don't work on Stockfish, but I can suggest using ShashChess instead. It is Stockfosh, but on top of that, it has been improved to capture the spirit of the human ingenuity and creativity.
The TRM paper addresses this blog post. I don't think you need to read the HRM analysis very carefully, the TRM has the advantage of being disentangled compared to the HRM, making ablations easier. I think the real…
Yeah, humans are very similar. We have intuitive immediate-next-step-suggestions, and then we apply these intuitive next steps, until we find that it lead to a dead end, and then we backtrack. I always say, the way we…
This is NOT the paper, but probably a very similar solution: https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.03393
The thing is, Sutter's approach is much more sensible when looking at real world adaptation. You can start using the cppfront transpiler, and importantly, if it doesn't work out, you can just use the C++ code generated…
And for the stuff that matters, it is usually possible to tinker around enough to get it pretty much as good as Rust or C++.
> no language with GC gets closer than a 2-3x the time of a non-GC language This is wrong. At least, it is not true generally. I wrote a 1:1 port of my C++ chess engine, and after a bit of fiddling with compiler options…
I don't work on Stockfish, but I can suggest using ShashChess instead. It is Stockfosh, but on top of that, it has been improved to capture the spirit of the human ingenuity and creativity.
The TRM paper addresses this blog post. I don't think you need to read the HRM analysis very carefully, the TRM has the advantage of being disentangled compared to the HRM, making ablations easier. I think the real…
Yeah, humans are very similar. We have intuitive immediate-next-step-suggestions, and then we apply these intuitive next steps, until we find that it lead to a dead end, and then we backtrack. I always say, the way we…
This is NOT the paper, but probably a very similar solution: https://arxiv.org/abs/2009.03393
The thing is, Sutter's approach is much more sensible when looking at real world adaptation. You can start using the cppfront transpiler, and importantly, if it doesn't work out, you can just use the C++ code generated…
And for the stuff that matters, it is usually possible to tinker around enough to get it pretty much as good as Rust or C++.
> no language with GC gets closer than a 2-3x the time of a non-GC language This is wrong. At least, it is not true generally. I wrote a 1:1 port of my C++ chess engine, and after a bit of fiddling with compiler options…