Author: Uri Blass
Date: 12:44:51 01/07/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 07, 2003 at 15:43:24, Uri Blass wrote:
>On January 07, 2003 at 14:11:21, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote:
>
>>On January 07, 2003 at 12:18:13, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>On January 07, 2003 at 11:36:03, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>
>>>>On January 07, 2003 at 10:48:54, Dieter Buerssner wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On January 07, 2003 at 10:41:18, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On January 07, 2003 at 09:31:35, Daniel Clausen wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On January 07, 2003 at 09:16:21, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Here are some kind of remarks:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual Studio\VC98\INCLUDE\stdio.h(97): remark #344:
>>>>>>>>typedef name has already been declared (with same type)
>>>>>>>> typedef char * va_list;
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>[snip]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>My guess is that the Intel compiler is more ANSI-compliant than the M$-compiler
>>>>>>>and therefore doesn't like the M$-system header files too much.
>>>>>
>>>>>Yes. You just have to ignore those warnings.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>>>2)I get a lot of remarks for movei and the most popular remark is
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>external definition with no prior declaration
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Not quite sure what the compiler means with that.. but maybe you call a function
>>>>>>>XYZ and the compiler didn't see the declaration before of this function before
>>>>>>>that. (like forgot to include the header-file where the function would/should be
>>>>>>>declared)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Is there a reason that I need to declare that function.
>>>>>
>>>>>>All calls for the functions are done after the function and in the same file.
>>>>>
>>>>>In this case, everything is ok. You might need to change
>>>>>
>>>>>int foo()
>>>>>{ /* */ }
>>>>>
>>>>>to
>>>>>
>>>>>int foo(void)
>>>>>{ /* */ }
>>>>>
>>>>>For the unspecified order of evaluation, you might want to show an example.
>>>>>
>>>>>Regards,
>>>>>Dieter
>>>>
>>>>I got that warning in the following function that is supposed to give the change
>>>>in the evaluation by a move.
>>>>
>>>>int evalmove(move_bytes m)
>>>>{
>>>> return evalmovewithoutpawns(m)+evalpawnchange(m);
>>>>}
>>>>
>>>>evalmovewithoutpawns gives the change in the evaluation from the piece square
>>>>table when evalpawnchange gives the change in the evaluation from the change in
>>>>the pawn structure.
>>>>
>>>>Uri
>>>
>>>Another thing that I do not like is that some tests that I do suggest that
>>>movei performs sligthly worse at very fast time control(1-10 seconds per game)
>>>
>>>I suspect that it is possible that the intel compiler made movei faster at slow
>>>time control but slower at super bullet.
>>>
>>>I think that I will use the old compiler because the improvement from the intel
>>>compiler seems to be minimal and I do not like the big number of warnings that I
>>>get that may hide important warning.
>>
>>Once in a while, it is a VERY good idea to use all the compilers that you have
>>and make sure that all the binaries produced work in the same way (i.e. they
>>give the same amount of nodes etc.). You do not need to _choose_ one compiler
>>and erase the rest from your computer.
>>
>>Miguel
>
>The problem is that the intel compiler is only for evaluation until the end of
>january.
>
>I also suspect that the fact that some changes in my computer made the same
>movei relatively weaker at very fast time control(I downloaded a big file of
>Service pack 5 for microsoft visual C++ and maybe the big file make movei slower
>only in the first milisecond).
>
>I now tested a previous version that I liked it's results and it produced worse
>results so it is possible that some change in my computer make movei slower at
>very fast time control or maybe the computer at very fast time control does not
>give the same cpu time for both programs and last time movei was lucky and today
>movei is unlucky.
>
>Statistical error is also a possibility but based on experience movei and Gerbil
>are relatively deterministic even at very fast time control(I still test against
>Gerbil at fast time control).
>
>I remember that sune claimed that even with no book games do not happen twice at
>1,2,3 second per game but it is not my experience and if I repeat a match of 40
>games when movei always changes the first move games happen twice and even if
>they do not happen exactly the same they may be often almost the same.
>
>Uri
I can add that I say different matches because in one match I care always to
change the first move so there cannot be doubles.
Uri
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.