Author: John Lowe
Date: 00:36:59 12/21/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 21, 2002 at 02:57:48, Uri Blass wrote: >On December 20, 2002 at 23:49:19, John Lowe wrote: > >>When you program castling, you have to checkout the empty squares for attack - >>theres no reason why you couldn't do this in your situation looking "through" >>the king. It seems much more efficient to let the king go there and find it's in >>check. > > >No it is not > >When the king castle I can simply use my attack table to find if the square is >under attack > >When the king is in check I cannot trust them and I need to use some more >complicated algorithm. > >Uri Hi Uri I use two routines for move-list generation - one simply generates peudo-legal moves and the other simultaneously collects info on attacks, defences, pins veiled attacks etc - but both write pseudo-legal moves and live with the consequences later. How expensive (in time) is the generation/updating of an attack table ...... or is it fundamental to your program anyway? John
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.