kingliveson wrote:hyatt wrote:
What he has done is _not_ remarkable. It represents a lot of work. Transplanting a heart and lungs is remarkable and I would have no chance in pulling this off. Building a barbed-wire fence around the state of Texas is a simple task that would take forever. I know how to do that task. This is true of disassembling code. Most CS students (certainly those in my assembly language / architecture course) understand a high-level language like C/C++, and a very low-level language in assembler code. And they know how to translate directly from C to assembler to do the same task. And in learning that, they learn how to go in "the other direction" at the same time.
Here at UCF, ASM introduction begins with Embedded Systems using Motorola 6811 micro-controller and Computer Architecture is VHDL. Combine these courses with Digital Systems and C programming, you have decent background. Where I disagree is saying what was done here is not remarkable. Sure with your extensive background in the field it may come easy. Even some very talented programmers have a difficult time doing do the reverse -- that is ASM to C. I think he's shown to have good knowledge in computer chess programming by the detailed report he produced.
It's certainly true that the detailed report is a recommendation at to its own status. I'm assuming that the detailed comments next to the asm sections really are meaningful in context, it would not be too good if the comments had been placed next to random bits of assembler, in other words I hope the community is not relying on the comment-asm match by default
Nevertheless, what we have is:
a) An assertion by Vas to the tune that IPPOLIT is reverse engineered with modifications from Rybka3. The assertion is without evidential backing.
b) A denial by IPPOLIT team. The denial is without evidential backing, but that's hardly surprising, proving a negative is not too easy. As in XYZ denies being a murderer but is unsurprisingly unable to account for his movements 24 hours a day 7 days a week etc. The onus has to be on the accuser to provide the evidence.
c) There is one and only one piece of detailed evidence. That points to a completely clean IPPOLIT. The detailed evidence suffers from anonymity, but it is the ONLY evidence.
d) IPPOLIT remains blackballed on various forums.
Given the current situation as is, and judging, fairly and without bias, it is difficult not to suggest that since the ONLY evidence says IPPOLIT is clean, IPPOLIT should be given immediate status as any other chess engine on forums, with links, in tournaments etc.
Meanwhile, everything, including many reputations, hangs on the status of BB and whether or not that status is good, or, on the repeatability of his report. Do others, prepared to do the work, confirm. Or, do others, with detailed checking of the asm-comments confirm they match.