Talk:Chess player

Task size

This draft task, while fairly well defined, feels daunting. Is it possible to at least split it into pieces (e.g., framework to allow two players to play chess, and a robot implementation of a player)? –Donal Fellows 10:55, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

My intention for this task was only the second part. A special chess front end is not necessary, just the input and output of moves (it is just an add-on that the PicoLisp solution outputs a simple ASCII board display). --Abu 12:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I didn't know that single-word names should be avoided. Then perhaps a better name would have been "Chess engine"? This is how it seems to be usually called. --Abu 12:20, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

On the other hand, "Chess engine" would sound really daunting ;-) --Abu 14:34, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I think this task is too large, having reviewed and written several small chess programs in various languages. How about some smaller pieces: alpha-beta search, move generation, board representation, xboard or UCI protocol handler, EPD parser. Note that there are entire wikis devoted to just this task (http://chessprogramming.wikispaces.com).

I don't think so. The PicoLisp solution has 447 lines (without the white space). There are tasks in RosettaCode with larger solutions. I feel it would be difficult to separate the pieces, as they strongly depend on each other. --Abu 18:04, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

I would love to see folks attempt a modern chess engine in other languages though. My recent survey found that all the top engines were in C/C++ (rated 3000-3300), with the Delphi engine Booot at 2935, Java engine Cuckoo at 2675, and C sharp engine Pupsi at 2610. Engines in other languages were only of amateur demo quality, not even worth mentioning. --IanOsgood 17:21, 24 April 2012 (UTC)