Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 03:43:51 06/14/98
Go up one level in this thread
On June 13, 1998 at 23:17:37, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On June 11, 1998 at 09:00:21, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>Suppose we have 2 cases for a rook >>at the horizontal axis: >> a) rook at a1 where we count fields b1,c1,d1,e1 >> it's clear that this works for above representation. this is >>probably >> what you have in mind. >> b) rook at a1 where we count fields b1,d1,e1 >> You can't do this. BUT YOU DON'T WANT TO COUNT C1 AS YOU >> DON'T CONTROL IT, for example because there are doubled rooks >> of opponent at c-file which is open. > >Let's say that A is the bitboard representing where the rook can move. >B could be one of many things: the bitboard representing squares the >opponent attacks at least as many times as you do, the bitboard >representing squares the opponent attacks with a piece of lesser (or >equal) value than the rook, the bitboard representing whatever your >imagination comes up with... but in every case, computing A and not B >should give you what you want in one clock cycle. > >Of course B isn't that easy to generate, depending on what you choose >for it, but it's not like bitboards make this sort of computation >impossible or extremely expensive either. Suppose you have both A and B, then how do you compute it in O(1)? Not possible with the current array sizes. >Dave Gomboc
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.