Author: Vincent Diepeveen
Date: 08:33:47 04/02/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 01, 2004 at 18:29:27, Dann Corbit wrote: >On April 01, 2004 at 17:59:38, Eugene Nalimov wrote: > >>On April 01, 2004 at 15:16:34, Marc Bourzutschky wrote: >> >>>The Chessmaster format is indeed better >> >>What does it mean "better"? :-) >> >>It stores less information, thus compresses better. > >I have an idea that I think would be helpful if you should be so kind as to >perform it. > >Write a scanner that reads your wonderful EGTB files and spits out a two bit >state only for each position (won/lost/drawn/broke) to create bitbase files. > >The reason I suggest it is that a bazillion programmers won't have to reinvent >the wheel. > >I suggest the use of the bitbase files early in the search (completely pulled >into ram) and then EGTB at the leaves if the bitbase indicates it is worthwhile. I have to admit Dann, that your idea makes sense. That's why i'm using w/d/l in my egtb's.
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.