Author: Bo Persson
Date: 06:39:51 08/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On August 08, 2003 at 08:43:49, Uri Blass wrote: >On August 08, 2003 at 08:22:30, Bo Persson wrote: > >> >>That move generation tests are silly, because they compare apples to organges? > >Did not you learn that it is better to ignore everything that vincent say? No, because I am totally out of my mind. Vincent told me that the other day. :-) >He attacks personally people who disagree with him so it is better to say >nothing if you disagree with him. So then I shouldn't say this: I once tried to avoid the "slow" bitboard operations by saving a list of From squares. While generating capture moves, I also stored the squares in an array. Then I could use this array "for free" when generating non-capturing moves. Saved me one bitboard scan! Guess what - it made my move generation slower. Scanning the same MovingPieces bitboard twice, once for captures and once for non-captures was faster. >My post was not about the importance of the tests but a simple question to sune. >Sune said that he is using incremental move generator Yes, if you use bitboards you can do that. Easily. >It is unimportant to discuss about subjects that vincent talk about unless he >apologizes about his bad behaviour. Why should he apologize, when he is always right? I was very happy to read about how he does a branchless version of if (piece == pawn) earlier in this thread. You learn something every day! > >Uri Bo Persson
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.