Author: Uri Blass
Date: 14:34:22 02/22/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 22, 2003 at 17:24:26, Uri Blass wrote:
>On February 22, 2003 at 17:14:35, Dezhi Zhao wrote:
>
>>On February 22, 2003 at 16:00:00, Uri Blass wrote:
>>
>>>On February 22, 2003 at 15:28:06, Dezhi Zhao wrote:
>>>
>>>>On February 22, 2003 at 02:54:40, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On February 21, 2003 at 15:59:25, Dezhi Zhao wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>On February 21, 2003 at 13:31:50, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>On February 21, 2003 at 13:10:27, Dezhi Zhao wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>On February 21, 2003 at 12:48:45, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>On February 21, 2003 at 11:15:24, Dezhi Zhao wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>On February 21, 2003 at 04:14:49, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>On February 20, 2003 at 13:51:37, Filip Tvrzsky wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>On February 20, 2003 at 12:49:39, Uri Blass wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>I guess that you mean
>>>>>>>>>>>>>#define gen_dat_i_mpromote (gen_dat[i].m & (63 << 16))
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>I guess that the laternative that I tried
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>#define to(x) (((x)>>8)&255) was also bad
>>>>>>>>>>>>>and better was
>>>>>>>>>>>>>#define to(x) (((x)&255<<8)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>I guess that in that case I need to change some more code
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>For example
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>I have today some cases when I have
>>>>>>>>>>>>>switch(m.bits)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>case 1:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>case 17:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>in that case I need to say case 1<<24 and in order not to have an ugly code
>>>>>>>>>>>>>I need to have more constants for 2^24,2^24*17,...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>I can use
>>>>>>>>>>>>>enum
>>>>>>>>>>>>>{
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bits1=16777216
>>>>>>>>>>>>> bits17=
>>>>>>>>>>>>>...
>>>>>>>>>>>>>}
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>Uri
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>#define to(x) (((x)>>8)&255) is definitely worse than #define to(x)
>>>>>>>>>>>>(((x)&255<<8) because in the first case the shifting is done in run-time and in
>>>>>>>>>>>>the second during compilation. Note also that the result of both macros is
>>>>>>>>>>>>different.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>Yes
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>This is an important note.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>I did not do the mistake of assuming that they are the same but I see that I
>>>>>>>>>>>have problems.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>I cannot use my usual macros after that translate
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>for example
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>I had if (piece(m.b.to))=PAWN) in my code
>>>>>>>>>>>I cannot transalate it to
>>>>>>>>>>>if (piece(to(m))==PAWN) because to(m) does not get something between 0 and 63
>>>>>>>>>>>after the change and it seem that I cannot do it faster in this case.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>you probabaly need another inline function or micro here:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>#define IsPawn(move) (piece(move.b.to) == PAWN)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>note that piece() is not a function and it is in my defines
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>#define piece(square) ((info[square])&7)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>The point is that info[64] include for every square both the color and both the
>>>>>>>>>piece and the piece can be accesed by the array info[64] that is an array of
>>>>>>>>>int.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>nested macroes are OK.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>If you are using VC, inline functions are prefered. You can easily browse these
>>>>>>>>>>inline fuctions. And the compiler does type checking that is certainly helpful.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>I do not see a function that I should inline in that case because there is no
>>>>>>>>>function in the code that I posted(only macros).
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>You missed the point that a inline function is the same in effect as a macro.
>>>>>>>>A inline function _is_ a much better macro.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Thanks for the advice.
>>>>>>>I use visual C++ but
>>>>>>>I saved the files in my project as .c
>>>>>>>I guess that inline functions mean that I need to change the .c to .cpp first
>>>>>>
>>>>>>yes. a simple rename
>>>>>
>>>>>It is not so simple because I get errors from doing it
>>>>>
>>>>>hash_table = calloc(TableSize, sizeof( HASHE ));
>>>>>
>>>>>: error C2440: '=' : cannot convert from 'void *' to 'struct tagHASHE *'
>>>>> Conversion from 'void*' to pointer to non-'void' requires an explicit
>>>>>cast
>>>>>evaluate.cpp
>>>>>
>>>>>I get also warnings that I did not get in C
>>>>>
>>>>>warning C4390: ';' : empty controlled statement found; is this the intent?
>>>>>
>>>>>My reply Yes it is
>>>>>I ignore opponent time but I may use it in the future so I told my program to do
>>>>>nothing when it gets the opponent time from winboard.
>>>>>
>>>>>warning C4551: function call missing argument list
>>>>>
>>>>>At least I could fix that warning by changing
>>>>>
>>>>>input_available
>>>>>to
>>>>>input_available()
>>>>>
>>>>>Strange that I did not get the same warning in C.
>>>>>
>>>>>Uri
>>>>
>>>>These added warnings are good things in fact. C++ has some more tight type
>>>>checking. So you may consider changing those generating warnings, like this:
>>>>
>>>>hash_table = (tagHASHE*) calloc(TableSize, sizeof(HASHE));
>>>>
>>>>or the C style:
>>>>
>>>>hash_table = (struct tagHASHE *) calloc(TableSize, sizeof(HASHE));
>>>>
>>>>dzhao
>>>
>>>Thanks but I still have problems.
>>>
>>>I tried in my C files(I renamed them back to C) and got the following warnings
>>>
>>>warning C4047: 'function' : 'unsigned int ' differs in levels of indirection
>>>from 'struct tagHASHE *'
>>
>>this warning must come from somewhere else. you can double-click at the warning
>>to see which line it is complainng about.
>
>I cannot double click on the warning but the line is exactly line 370
>and here is the content of that line:
>
>hash_table = calloc((struct tagHASHE *) TableSize, sizeof( HASHE ));
>
>
>>
>>>warning C4024: 'calloc' : different types for formal and actual parameter 1
>>>
>>>
>>>Note that TableSize is an integer and here is the relvant defintion in my
>>>program.
>>
>>parameter 1 of calloc is an unsigned. so you may define TableSize as unsigned.
>
>only helps to get another warning for line 366 that is posted here
>
>while (TableSize>=(1<<i))
>
>main.c(366) : warning C4018: '>=' : signed/unsigned mismatch
>
>I still have these 2 warnings for line 370
>
>warning C4047: 'function' : 'unsigned int ' differs in levels of indirection
>from 'struct tagHASHE *'
>warning C4024: 'calloc' : different types for formal and actual parameter 1
>
>
>Uri
I can add that with C I have no warning with the following code when TableSize
is simply define to be int and the problems were only when I change the files to
.cpp
TableSize=hash_in_mbytes<<20;
TableSize=TableSize/sizeof(HASHE);
i=0;
while (TableSize>=(1<<i))
i++;
TableSize=1<<(i-1);
hash_table = calloc(TableSize, sizeof( HASHE ));
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.