Author: Albert Bertilsson
Date: 09:30:12 02/24/03
Go up one level in this thread
On February 24, 2003 at 12:19:51, Uri Blass wrote: >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 Ok thanx for that answer Uri, basically you have a board size of 4000+ bytes which would of course take quite some time to copy. I think I'll probably stick to UndoMove (since it is there already) and I guess that the key here are those attack boards that I don't have yet. Regards Albert
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.