Author: Gerd Isenberg
Date: 22:24:31 03/07/06
Go up one level in this thread
<snip>
>>>>your eval or other odd things like that).
>>>
>>>** I do use floating point for the evaluation. This is a relic of something
>>>** that can be pulled out of the program if it is a really bad thing. Bob
>>>** has said it is due to floating points always being off.
>>>
>>
>>Floats just for eval or also all bounds and scores backed up to the root?
>>SSE floats or doubles under w64 are quite efficient, for instance you (or your
>>compiler) can work with vectors of four floats per instruction.
>>Is your nullwindow {alfa, alfa+1.0} or something like {alfa, alfa+1.0e-10}?
>
>They're all doubles and for everything that would normally be an int.
>
>This is handled with a typedef and could fairly easily be an int with
>some additional ifdefd code for %d as opposed to %f.
>
>My null window is always -alpha-1,-alpha.
>
while 1 is the smallest int greater zero, i wonder with float or doubles whether
there is no "smaller" null window dependent on a possible fractional part of
your evaluation. Did you try -alpha-epsilon,-alpha for null windows with epsilon
far less one?
>If you think double is severely affecting reproducibility or putting
>bugs in that could cause a performance-hurting issue, I can make it
>int.
>
>Stuart
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.