Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 16:47:14 06/09/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 09, 1998 at 17:04:05, Scott Gasch wrote: >Thanks a lot, your description was excellent, I've implemented it and it >works. >As a followup, you say that the memcpy won't hurt performance much but >I'm not >so sure of that... in your experience, is it better to use a 2D array >for the >PV or linked lists? With the prior you have the issue of memcpys >whereas with >the latter you have the overhead of a memcpy per ply but can then link >the >ply-1 list to the ply list very easily. Of course then you have to deal >with >free calls... > >Thanks again for the help. > >Scott it hardly ever happens. So you could copy it bit by bit using a washing machine microprocessor and it wouldn't slow you down one bit... check your search (assuming you are using a PVS derivative) and note how many nodes you enter where beta != alpha+1. It will almost *never* happen... which means you can not possibly need to back up a PV thru such a node...
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.