Author: Nagendra Singh Tomar
Date: 04:55:50 10/29/02
Go up one level in this thread
On October 29, 2002 at 04:45:02, Severi Salminen wrote: >>In incremental move generation I understand that we have different phases of >>move generation viz GEN_HASH_MOVE, GEN_KILLER_MOVE, GEN_CAP etc >>My question is, suppose we generate the lone hash move in the GEN_HASH_MOVE >>phase and suppose (unfortunately) it did'nt result in a cutoff so we have to >>generate more moves, say we are in GEN_CAP phase, do we test each move whether >>it has already been tried in GEN_HASH_MOVE and GEN_KILLER_MOVE phase OR do we >>simply generate all the moves without worrying whether the hash move (or killer >>moves) gets tried twice. > >First of all: I think the above is not traditionally called incremental move >generation. Incremental move generation means (if I'm not mistaken here) that we >update the legal moves list only when necessary between plies - we don't >generate them every ply. So in opening position we generate all moves for black >and white. White then moves e4. This affects then e4 pawn (of course) and king, >queen, g-knight and light bishop. Other pieces (including black) can make same >moves as before e4. So maybe the above should be called generation of moves in >phases or something. > >Secondly: what do you think is faster: searching a branch of maybe hundreds of >thousands of nodes (usually hash move generates a big sub-tree), or going >through an array of about 40 elements? The latter of course. So I think that >also in your engine you definitely should _not_ search any moves twice. > >Severi thanx for correcting me. tomar
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.