Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 06:03:09 12/05/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 05, 2002 at 04:15:35, Sune Fischer wrote: >That is not as bad as I thought, but ask yourself how often do you need this >information. >I think you will be needing it a lot when you begin building a sophisticated >eval(). >I don't believe it is a good idea to do the whole design of the engine around >the move generator alone, you should consider what you will be needing in all >the other phases. Ie. if move generation is 20% of your time and eval() is 50%, >then you really ought to be more worried about how to optimize the evaluation >and choose some structures that aren't too information limited/expensive. I had not considered this. Where do you think I would need a faster piece_on_square() type function in the evaluation? >>I'm starting to really like this. Non-rotated bitboards, no need for a >>first_one() type function, and virtually no lookup tables. > >Don't you need to index the zobrist table, for instance? I didn't think of this either. I'll have to think about this some more. It might be possible to compute the new hash key during move generation when I know the piece type and how the position is going to change. Russell
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.