Author: Uri Blass
Date: 09:19:51 02/24/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 24, 2003 at 11:41:03, Albert Bertilsson wrote: >Hello! > >I've done some testing and thinking and I ask the following question: >Why have an UnMakeMove or UndoMove function? > >When testing with Sharper I found that actually copying the board and then >calling DoMove on the new board was faster than using DoMove() / UndoMove() on >the same board. > >My Board size is 376 bytes, and I figure that will cause a copy function to >require some 94 copy instruction (on a 32 bit machine), this will of course also >require some sort of condition of when to stop copying and so, but I figure this >must be a much easier task than doing branches and testing if it was a capture >etc. and updating piece lists. I did not try it. I did not think that copy instruction of my array can be faster than updating it incrementally. If I play e2-e4 copying the information about a1,b1,c1,... seem to me intuitively a big waste of time. I also have clearly more than 94 copy instructions. I need 1024 copy instruction only in order to copy all the information that I have in one of my arrays that is updated in my makemove and my undomove(int[64][16]) 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.