Rankings Stable

Fragment of a discussion from Talk:LiteRumble
← Thread:Talk:LiteRumble/Rankings Stable/reply (3)

Jump to navigation Jump to search

I personally oscillating between "if the author does not care, why should I?" and "preserve the history". If you are in the second camp, let me remind about my FixingParticipantLinks script which relinks missing bots to strange automata archive.

What is our problem with Java 8? Do we already have bots with Java 9? Or robocode itself is not backward compatible and you see it on big enough robot pull?

Beaming (talk)‎

You do not have permission to edit this page, for the following reasons:

The action you have requested is limited to users in the group: Users.
You must confirm your email address before editing pages. Please set and validate your email address through your user preferences.

You can view and copy the source of this page.

My opinion is that as long as a bot works fine on current settings (robocode 1.9.2.5 and Java 8), we should "preserve the history". But once it produces random result (e.g. crashing half of the time), we should remove it (until the author should fix it). 

Bots known to crash on some machines:

<pre>
apc.Caan 1.0
dam.MogBot 2.9
sgp.JollyNinja 3.53
</pre>

Return to Thread:Talk:LiteRumble/Rankings Stable/reply (4).

Retrieved from "http://robowiki.net/wiki/Thread:Talk:LiteRumble/Rankings_Stable/reply_(3)#Rankings_Stable_6270"