Robocode Rumble: Tips From the Champs
Jason writes "The Robocode Rumble is over and the winners have been declared. Who are they and what are the secrets of their success? Dana Barrow talks shop with some of the mad scientists behind the winning Javabots and with Mat Nelson, who reveals what he has planned for Robocode 2.0. You can get the free download here."
(* Too bad that good OOP and Java are mutually exclusive. *)
Everybody and their dog have a different opinion on what "good OOP" is [1]. You will start a huge flamewar by bringing up that. No doubt Smalltalk fans will jump in saying that Smalltalk is the only "true" OO. Then Eiffle fans.....
[1] This relates to one of the problems with OOP in my opinion: lack of consistency in design methodologies. (oop.ismad.com)
Table-ized A.I.
Java
seems
fast
to
me.
Really.
Sincerely, Shellon Turtlebum
Table-ized A.I.
(* Better or worse than what? You "lack decent evidence" that you are comparing OOP to anything in particular. *)
Anything. The literature often brags about how OO improves stuff, makes maintenance allegedly easier, etc. You tell me what they are comparing. I did not write all that.
I generally compare it to procedural with liberal usage of a database. Databases and OOP tend to fight over territory. In procedural/relational the "noun model" is mostly in the database or reduced to relational formulas. In OOP the noun model is mostly via code structure. Databases are overall superior IMO than code for managing noun models and noun-related structuring. At least for me. Databases are more powerful than code when things scale or change. In summary:
OOP:
tasks: In code
noun model: Via code structures
P/R:
tasks: In code
noun model: Via relational database and formulas
BTW, I never compared them WRT robot games. However, the literature implies that OOP is for every domain.
Table-ized A.I.