3 ms·

Yeah, I don't understand why the metric isn't "complete chess engine that achieves X ELO" in yyy bytes or something. Instead it seems to have been "minimal thi

by ekelsen 3mo ago

Yeah, I don't understand why the metric isn't "complete chess engine that achieves X ELO" in yyy bytes or something. Instead it seems to have been "minimal thing that kinda looks like chess in yyy bytes"

taftster 3mo ago
I'd suggest just ensuring that the entire rules of chess are first evaluated or supported in a chess program, before worrying about ELO rating, etc.
applfanboysbgon 3mo ago
> X ELO in yyy bytes Because then you're measuring on two axes. Which is better, 1500 elo in 300 bytes or 1550 elo in 310 bytes? For a byte count comparison to make much sense, the program really ought to have a static target criteria.
- ekelsen 3mo ago
  I used a placeholder for X ELO, but my point was the community should pick one value that makes sense and then not change it.
- noiv 3mo ago
  Interesting would be how much bytes improve by 100 ELO?