Game moves statistics, any program for that ?

oca · **#21**

Yes... that's true... that's just that I last touched C at school 20 years ago... and I would like to concentrate on go, not on learning C (again)...

All I need (at least in a first time) is a function that can take a move, a pattern and a game and see if the pattern apply to the move...
so I think doing that in javascript will be faster for me then learning C...

RBerenguel · **#22**

oca wrote:

Yes... that's true... that's just that I last touched C at school 20 years ago... and I would like to concentrate on go, not on learning C (again)...

All I need (at least in a first time) is a function that can take a move, a pattern and a game and see if the pattern apply to the move...
so I think doing that in javascript will be faster for me then learning C...

Well, no. Because sgfinfo (from sgfutils) already does this: there's no need to rewrite the pattern-matching. But well, go on. I also prefer tinkering javascript than C (I just commented whole sections of what I have called sgfrender.c for sgfutils and well, C... I also have a toy SGF parser in JS and some other pieces round here, but I eventually rewrote it in go because I wanted to explore +500 games and use a database and I'm more proficient with go than with node) so I'd be happy to play with it when it's a little more "code dense."

SmoothOper · **#23**

oca wrote:

Yes... that's true... that's just that I last touched C at school 20 years ago... and I would like to concentrate on go, not on learning C (again)...

All I need (at least in a first time) is a function that can take a move, a pattern and a game and see if the pattern apply to the move...
so I think doing that in javascript will be faster for me then learning C...

That's how these things always get started. I would chime in and say. I am charged with maintainance hundreds of pages of classisic asp, vb+HTML+JavaScript and thousands of lines of vb.net thinking to myself if they had only had enough spine to write something strongly typed this would be so much easier to maintain and extend. Of course all the people who made these decisions jumped ship.

oca · **#24**

SmoothOper wrote:

That's how these things always get started. I would chime in and say. I am charged with maintainance hundreds of pages of classisic asp, vb+HTML+JavaScript and thousands of lines of vb.net thinking to myself if they had only had enough spine to write something strongly typed this would be so much easier to maintain and extend. Of course all the people who made these decisions jumped ship.

I understand your point, and quiet agree... but I don't expect to have a large code base... if so I may have choose Haskell or Java + OSGi. But for that "small" project, I think node.js is just fine.

Like in go, we sometimes need a solid connection, and sometimes a faster one...

oca · **#25**

That starts to be funny ...
very first results (still a bit wrong I think...)

Code:

Plugin : plugin_count_moves.js
Plugin : plugin_moves.js
----------------------------------------
Found 1 games in file 'sgf/handicap.sgf'
----------------------------------------
PLUGIN : COUNT MOVES

294 moves
----------------------------------------
PLUGIN : MOVE STATISTICS

                  black   white
                  -----   -----
           Nobi :    88      75
         Kosumi :    13      20
           Hane :    29      36
     Ikken tobi :    52      39
     Niken tobi :    17      16
        Kogeima :    11       6
         Ogeima :     2       4
    Daidaigeima :     3       7
    Bamboo join :     5       4
      Cross cut :     1       0
          Tsuke :     7       9
   Shoulder hit :    12      24
            Cut :     7      12

=============================================================
Not identified :
Black : 0

White : 3
MOVE : 1
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 
  +--------------------------------------+
0 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
1 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
2 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
3 |. . . X . . . . . X . . . . . X . . . |
4 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
5 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(O). . |
6 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
7 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
8 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
9 |. . . X . . . . . X . . . . . X . . . |
0 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
1 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
2 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
3 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
4 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
5 |. . . X . . . . . X . . . . . X . . . |
6 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
7 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
8 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
  +--------------------------------------+

MOVE : 19
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 
  +--------------------------------------+
0 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
1 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
2 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
3 |. . . X . . . . . X . . . X . X . . . |
4 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
5 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O O X . |
6 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . |
7 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X X X . |
8 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O . |
9 |. . . X . . . . . X . . . . . X X O . |
0 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
1 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
2 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
3 |. .(O). . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
4 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
5 |. . . X . . . . . X . . . . . X . . . |
6 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
7 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
8 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
  +--------------------------------------+

MOVE : 57
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 
  +--------------------------------------+
0 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
1 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
2 |. . X O O . . O . X .(O). . . . . . . |
3 |. . X X . . . . . X . . . X . X . . . |
4 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
5 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . X O O X . |
6 |. . X . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . |
7 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . O X X X . |
8 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O O . |
9 |. . . X . . . . . X . . . . . X X O . |
0 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
1 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
2 |. O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
3 |. . O . X . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
4 |. O X . . . . O . O . . . . . . . . . |
5 |. . . X X . . X O X . . . . X X X . . |
6 |. . O O X . . X O X . . . O X O O . . |
7 |. . . . X . . X O . . . O . O X X . . |
8 |. . . . . . . . . . . . . O . . . . . |
  +--------------------------------------+

----------------------------------------

hoshi, komoku, sanssan, kakari, etc...  still to be implemented...

Moves are detected using simple pattern String... so that we can express them wihtout knowing that much of coding... the pattern is rotated and mirrored by the program to get all possibilities.

Code:

Ogeima :
  pattern = [
     "...X",
     "1..."
   ]


Shoulder hit :
  pattern = [
    ".O",
    "1."
  ]

where "1" is the position of the last played stone, "X" is a stone of same color then "1" (which can be black or white, not as in go diagram...) and "O" is a stone of other color then "1".
"." is a free intersection.

I still have to add things like "?" for "anything" and "#" for any stone color.

Here are the patterns for now, as they appear in the code (should be readable I hope :geek:

...).

Still a bit of cleaning and I will post a first beta version for whose who may want to play with it...

quantumf · **#26**

SmoothOper wrote:

...thousands of lines of vb.net...if they had only had...strongly typed this...

Code:

' Enable VB.Net strong typing 
Option Strict On

They didn't do this, then?

SmoothOper · **#27**

quantumf wrote:

SmoothOper wrote:

...thousands of lines of vb.net...if they had only had...strongly typed this...

Code:

' Enable VB.Net strong typing 
Option Strict On

They didn't do this, then?

What's next is someone going to point out how you can actually write object oriented VB. Sigh

If dumb response then
With sarcasm

let's all write object oriented strongly typed code in a language that wasn't designed for it, boy that'll be easy...

End with sarcasm

quantumf · **#28**

As VB.NET is equivalent to c# in essentially every way, it's clearly an object oriented language by design. It has the flavour of basic, with it's terms and symbols, and in a concession to VB6 programmers, it allows a procedural, non-OO form. I have developed multiple large (object oriented) systems with VB.NET, and find it a perfectly comfortable OO language

SmoothOper · **#29**

quantumf wrote:

As VB.NET is equivalent to c# in essentially every way, it's clearly an object oriented language by design. It has the flavour of basic, with it's terms and symbols, and in a concession to VB6 programmers, it allows a procedural, non-OO form. I have developed multiple large (object oriented) systems with VB.NET, and find it a perfectly comfortable OO language

On error resume next

On erro goto....

Clearly not OO or easy to manage in large projects. I find these constructs especially discomforting, and especially error prone, for anything but the simplest of code. Not to mention, that sooner or later in large projects you have to do an N^2 or N*log(n) operation like sorts or searches, then it pretty much crawls to a halt. Furthermore, VB programmers like many single language programmers fail to recognize the relative disadvantages of their language, and are generally thin skinned and uncool about it. After all if it were object oriented then they shouldn't feel that it is too difficult to use another language in the first place, but again this is not the case.

RBerenguel · **#30**

SmoothOper wrote:

quantumf wrote:

As VB.NET is equivalent to c# in essentially every way, it's clearly an object oriented language by design. It has the flavour of basic, with it's terms and symbols, and in a concession to VB6 programmers, it allows a procedural, non-OO form. I have developed multiple large (object oriented) systems with VB.NET, and find it a perfectly comfortable OO language

On error resume next

On erro goto....

Clearly not OO or easy to manage in large projects. I find these constructs especially discomforting, and especially error prone, for anything but the simplest of code. Not to mention, that sooner or later in large projects you have to do an N^2 or N*log(n) operation like sorts or searches, then it pretty much crawls to a halt. Furthermore, VB programmers like many single language programmers fail to recognize the relative disadvantages of their language, and are generally thin skinned and uncool about it. After all if it were object oriented then they shouldn't feel that it is too difficult to use another language in the first place, but again this is not the case.

Like object-orientedness was the panacea to solve everything. Lisp programmers are pretty much happy without ever resorting to CLOS. Go has interfaces and structs and it works pretty well. The example above? This is error handling. Error handling is good, and there's no need to add object-mumbo-jumbo to do it. Quite likely the problem this code had was orthogonality, or quite more likely, a bad maintainer.

SmoothOper · **#31**

RBerenguel wrote:

SmoothOper wrote:

quantumf wrote:

As VB.NET is equivalent to c# in essentially every way, it's clearly an object oriented language by design. It has the flavour of basic, with it's terms and symbols, and in a concession to VB6 programmers, it allows a procedural, non-OO form. I have developed multiple large (object oriented) systems with VB.NET, and find it a perfectly comfortable OO language

On error resume next

On erro goto....

Clearly not OO or easy to manage in large projects. I find these constructs especially discomforting, and especially error prone, for anything but the simplest of code. Not to mention, that sooner or later in large projects you have to do an N^2 or N*log(n) operation like sorts or searches, then it pretty much crawls to a halt. Furthermore, VB programmers like many single language programmers fail to recognize the relative disadvantages of their language, and are generally thin skinned and uncool about it. After all if it were object oriented then they shouldn't feel that it is too difficult to use another language in the first place, but again this is not the case.

Like object-orientedness was the panacea to solve everything. Lisp programmers are pretty much happy without ever resorting to CLOS. Go has interfaces and structs and it works pretty well. The example above? This is error handling. Error handling is good, and there's no need to add object-mumbo-jumbo to do it. Quite likely the problem this code had was orthogonality, or quite more likely, a bad maintainer.

Absence of OO(or pointers) becomes painfully obvious in large projects, so much so that many languages fake it. Anyway, VB error handling with a bunch of goto's is lame, generally speaking OO programming doesn't have goto's.

RBerenguel · **#32**

So what? Error handling with gotos, if done well is perfectly fine. Seems like someone drank too much Dijkstra kool-aid.

SmoothOper · **#33**

RBerenguel wrote:

So what? Error handling with gotos, if done well is perfectly fine. Seems like someone drank too much Dijkstra kool-aid.

Done well VB programmers :lol:

nah, that wouldn't be quick and easy, if they wanted to do it well they wouldn't use error prone goto.

RBerenguel · **#34**

Quite a big ego to dismiss all VB programmers.

SmoothOper · **#35**

RBerenguel wrote:

Quite a big ego to dismiss all VB programmers.

Oh yeah, I get a kick out of pointing out that VB programmers aren't very good, reminds me of the good old days when I graded VB sections as a TA as a service for the business school. Sure there might have been an enthusiastic and intelligent one in the bunch, but then they wouldn't have problems with moving beyond VB.

RBerenguel · **#36**

SmoothOper wrote:

RBerenguel wrote:

Quite a big ego to dismiss all VB programmers.

Oh yeah, I get a kick out of pointing out that VB programmers aren't very good, reminds me of the good old days when I graded VB sections as a TA as a service for the business school. Sure there might have been an enthusiastic and intelligent one in the bunch, but then they wouldn't have problems with moving beyond VB.

Well, I graded a lot of C assignments for computer science's introduction to algorithms and for numerical analysis in mathematics. And I won't say all C programmers suck because most of the CS students made an incredibly lousy job.

SmoothOper · **#37**

RBerenguel wrote:

SmoothOper wrote:

RBerenguel wrote:

Quite a big ego to dismiss all VB programmers.

Oh yeah, I get a kick out of pointing out that VB programmers aren't very good, reminds me of the good old days when I graded VB sections as a TA as a service for the business school. Sure there might have been an enthusiastic and intelligent one in the bunch, but then they wouldn't have problems with moving beyond VB.

Well, I graded a lot of C assignments for computer science's introduction to algorithms and for numerical analysis in mathematics. And I won't say all C programmers suck because most of the CS students made an incredibly lousy job.

I'm just saying I think you miss the point about why people program in VB in the first place, and it isn't for the OO features or good error handling, they don't care about that, they program in VB because they think it is easy, but it turns out to make OO more difficult. Furthermore, I have seen enough VB programmers code to know that this is generally the case. So, my ego is quite fine thank you.

RBerenguel · **#38**

No. You code in whatever language you are told. I had to code in f***ing VB for Applications once, because I had to make something work inside Excel for a client. Ended up doing it in Python and writing a small interaction layer in VBA, no way I'm doing SOAP with VB (not like the SOAP library for Python was great, had to fix it to get the WDSL file working). But as a programmer, you get into whatever there is. I'd rather code directly in binary than touching PHP, but when my coworkers or boss tells me to code something in PHP, "aye sir". I won't rewrite 8k lines of PHP in Go (or Lisp, C, or whatever other language I'm proficient at) just because I don't like the feature set.

A VB.net codebase could have been started as VB.net because a former (or current) worker is just one of the best in the world with the language (you know what? Even in "bad" languages there are people that can run in circles around you.) You don't like goto's for error handling? Fine, but the codebase is like this, take it or leave it. You like type checking? Either turn on strict or use descriptive variable names for type handling. You think OO is "the best evah" and goto's are a sin born in hell? Well, programming (and programming languages) has many facets, and you just know how to use one (and can't be sure about that). Learn more, or STFU.

SmoothOper · **#39**

RBerenguel wrote:

No. You code in whatever language you are told. I had to code in f***ing VB for Applications once, because I had to make something work inside Excel for a client. Ended up doing it in Python and writing a small interaction layer in VBA, no way I'm doing SOAP with VB (not like the SOAP library for Python was great, had to fix it to get the WDSL file working). But as a programmer, you get into whatever there is. I'd rather code directly in binary than touching PHP, but when my coworkers or boss tells me to code something in PHP, "aye sir". I won't rewrite 8k lines of PHP in Go (or Lisp, C, or whatever other language I'm proficient at) just because I don't like the feature set.

A VB.net codebase could have been started as VB.net because a former (or current) worker is just one of the best in the world with the language (you know what? Even in "bad" languages there are people that can run in circles around you.) You don't like goto's for error handling? Fine, but the codebase is like this, take it or leave it. You like type checking? Either turn on strict or use descriptive variable names for type handling. You think OO is "the best evah" and goto's are a sin born in hell? Well, programming (and programming languages) has many facets, and you just know how to use one (and can't be sure about that). Learn more, or STFU.

I agree, up to a point. I have maintained and worked on projects that consisted of thousands of lines of VBA, which they never put on the job listing. I think it is fair for myself to point out that this is a brain dead way of doing things, and to "rub their noses in it" whenever I can get away with doing so. First things first they want to do it the easy way, the next thing is they want to be all egotistical about their little scripts, so funny. Then they write thousands of lines of code that becomes unmanageable, and jump ship. Hilarious. I've seen VB projects that had rigid project testing that had dozens upon dozens of bugs every testing cycle, with little or no new code, just bug after bug...

oca · **#40**

Current version of the program tells me that :

Code:

MOVE : 9, ["Nobi","Peep","Shoulder hit"]
   0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 
  +--------------------------------------+
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
|. . . X . . . . . X . . . X . X . . . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O O . . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . X . . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .(O). |
|. . . X . . . . . X . . . . . X X O . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . O . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
|. . . X . . . . . X . . . . . X . . . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
|. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . |
  +--------------------------------------+

"Nobi" -> ok
"Peep" -> ok
but "Shoulder hit"... is this a shoulder hit ? from below :-?

Game moves statistics, any program for that ?

Who is online