Re: Python & chess

2006-08-25 Thread Paolo Pantaleo
2006/8/25, Katipo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: Paolo Pantaleo wrote: > Well Python is not a good language for writing a chess engine (even if > a chess engine exists: > http://www.kolumbus.fi/jyrki.alakuijala/pychess.html), but it could be > grat for chess interfaces, for drawing boards, and similar thi

Re: Python & chess

2006-08-24 Thread Ron Johnson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Steve Lamb wrote: > Ron Johnson wrote: >> but it could be grat for chess interfaces, for drawing boards, >> and similar things. > > Then I fail to see the problem unless he is unaware that Python > can call a C compiled lib and for computationally in

Re: Python & chess

2006-08-24 Thread Steve Lamb
Ron Johnson wrote: > but it could be grat for chess interfaces, for drawing boards, > and similar things. Then I fail to see the problem unless he is unaware that Python can call a C compiled lib and for computationally intensive tasks the author is encouraged to do just that. I fail

Re: Python & chess

2006-08-24 Thread Ron Johnson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Steve Lamb wrote: > Paolo Pantaleo wrote: >> 2006/8/24, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >>> The 1st link in his email describes how when a python chess >>> player was (mechanically) converted to C++, the resulting app >>> ran 10x faster. > >> That's

Re: Python & chess

2006-08-24 Thread Steve Lamb
Paolo Pantaleo wrote: > 2006/8/24, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> The 1st link in his email describes how when a python chess player >> was (mechanically) converted to C++, the resulting app ran 10x faster. > That's it, compiled languages are fastar than interperted ones. This is true.

Re: Python & chess

2006-08-24 Thread Katipo
Paolo Pantaleo wrote: > Well Python is not a good language for writing a chess engine (even if > a chess engine exists: > http://www.kolumbus.fi/jyrki.alakuijala/pychess.html), but it could be > grat for chess interfaces, for drawing boards, and similar things. I > foudn out a library for these th

Re: Python & chess

2006-08-24 Thread Paolo Pantaleo
2006/8/24, Ron Johnson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Steve Lamb wrote: > Paolo Pantaleo wrote: >> Well Python is not a good language for writing a chess engine >> (even if a chess engine exists: > > Uh... why? I mean that's a pretty definite statement to thr

Re: Python & chess

2006-08-24 Thread Ron Johnson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Steve Lamb wrote: > Paolo Pantaleo wrote: >> Well Python is not a good language for writing a chess engine >> (even if a chess engine exists: > > Uh... why? I mean that's a pretty definite statement to throw > out without an explanation. For those w

Re: Python & chess

2006-08-24 Thread Steve Lamb
Paolo Pantaleo wrote: > Well Python is not a good language for writing a chess engine (even if > a chess engine exists: Uh... why? I mean that's a pretty definite statement to throw out without an explanation. For those who are fond of the language, such as myself, we're left with extreme cu

Re: Python & chess

2006-08-24 Thread Ron Johnson
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Paolo Pantaleo wrote: > Well Python is not a good language for writing a chess engine (even if > a chess engine exists: > http://www.kolumbus.fi/jyrki.alakuijala/pychess.html), but it could be Maybe NumPy would speed things up? > grat for chess inter