Crestfallen Studios

They must feel so proud of themselves for writing the world's longest switch statement. Seriously, they go on and on about their algorithm, but it's obvious the final program is just a switch statement with 500,995,484,682,338,672,639 cases. Finding out what goes in all those cases is no doubt challenging, but the final program takes less CS know-how than making pong without the paddles. (The AI part anyway.)

JLAF wrote:They must feel so proud of themselves for writing the world's longest switch statement. Seriously, they go on and on about their algorithm, but it's obvious the final program is just a switch statement with 500,995,484,682,338,672,639 cases. Finding out what goes in all those cases is no doubt challenging, but the final program takes less CS know-how than making pong without the paddles. (The IA part anyway.)

I highly doubt tha... *Reads the article*

You're right. World's longest switch statement. >_>

JLAF wrote:They must feel so proud of themselves for writing the world's longest switch statement. Seriously, they go on and on about their algorithm, but it's obvious the final program is just a switch statement with 500,995,484,682,338,672,639 cases. Finding out what goes in all those cases is no doubt challenging, but the final program takes less CS know-how than making pong without the paddles. (The IA part anyway.)

AI?

And I made pong in Boreland graphics...That was a pain. So...If I make pong without the paddles...that makes...a square? That...doesn't move?

My greatest fear is having to work on some bullshit like that when I finish college...20 years on goddamn checkers...

How dare you insult that man's fine research! Without his important contribution to humanity we would all be doomed! Doomed I say!

Teenr0cker wrote:AI?

Boreland? (Fixed anyway though.)

Teenr0cker wrote:And I made pong in Boreland graphics...That was a pain. So...If I make pong without the paddles...that makes...a square? That...doesn't move?

A square the moves to one side of the screen, increases your score, and resets it's position. That requires ifs AND some minor graphics, which is more complicated than the gigantic switch statement they probably used for the AI of this chess program.


Anyway, now I'm wondering about that last part of the article. Playing card games is based on probability, and I would think a computer would be able to calculate all the required probabilities along with the expected gains fairly easily. Certainly more easily than a human could anyway. So why is the AI still inferior to humans?

It's still boreland to me.

I nearly beat the toughest AI on some Chess game once. It was a tie. We both only had our kings left.