Author: Bo Persson
Date: 05:22:30 08/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 08, 2003 at 07:40:11, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 08, 2003 at 06:47:34, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>On August 07, 2003 at 23:48:51, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: >> >>>You guys can figure out the rest i bet seeing this code. >>> >>>All that bitboard idiocy always. This kicks the hell out of it. >> >>I doubt it, I can with bitboards incrementally generate 59 Mn/s on my 2Gig, you >>claim 73 Mn/s on 2.1Gig, but that's not incrementally I bet. > >What do you mean by incrementally? That move generation tests are silly, because they compare apples to organges? If you keep your attack bitboards(!) updated at all times, raw move generation is extremely fast because part of the info is computed somewhere else. If you compute attack info only when needed, move generation is much slower but overall program speed is better. What do you prefer? :-) Bo Persson bop2@telia.com
This page took 0.01 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.