George Duke wrote on Thu, Nov 6, 2008 04:31 PM UTC:
Muller, it is one topic and a boring one. Can't you walk and chew gum at
the same time? You are great programmer and mediocre CV thinker. Let's
move on. To repeat, Muller provisionally had approval to use Falcon
noncommercially years 2009 and 2010. He never responded at all. That and
inveterate criticism revoked permission. Chess Variant Page I am sure will
not permit links to Muller's by mid- to late-2009 and 2010 indicating licensing
unapproved. At Falcon Chess we want nothing to do with him for months now
since when he started his rants. However, Muller is welcome to enter other
topics on CVs here intellectually and look forward to debate. // THIS IS A NEW THREAD, to try to bring other fields' (math, history of chess) to programming talk that tends to be appreciated mostly by few participants.
Programming C++ was always easier than C. C++ is programmer-friendly. At
computer classes, even bank programmers do well in C++. I have heard from
couple programmers Falcon is difficult. I am quite sure, from recollection
of C/C++, that Falcon is much harder than Queen. They would not be even of
same order. The same could be said comparing certain exotic, difficult
Mutators found in CVPage, compared to easy-to-learn, code, and apply Queen. However, strong
computer play of Falcon, or any CV, is of little interest fot the next 3 to
15 years. I hope actually that there are few for a while. Do we want CVs destroyed
before they are even played? For Track One complexifying, the question here is what directions should we go in board size, Mutators, or pieces? And how to encourage the crossover of smart chess-savvy OrthoChessists from their pastime to carefully-selected CVs?
