Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: BitBoard flop

Author: James Swafford

Date: 11:48:48 02/03/00

Go up one level in this thread


I completely agree.  I began with a bitmap engine (Tristram),
which I learned to implement studying Crafty.

Galahad started out that way, but in the spirit of
experimentation I changed to the "mailbox" method
shown in TSCP, leaving only pawn bitmaps.  I hate it.
I will likely change back if I ever get the time.

I think the nicest thing about bitmaps is the
ability to gen only captures, then cycle through
them before generating noncaps.  With any luck,
noncaps never have to be generated.

--
James

(I know you know all this Bob...)


On February 03, 2000 at 09:43:01, Robert Hyatt wrote:

>On February 02, 2000 at 21:57:27, Michael Neish wrote:
>
>>
>>Excuse me if I gripe.  I just spent two months converting my program to
>>bitboards and when I finally removed all the obvious bugs I find it's searching
>>about 30% slower than the original routine, which just used simple arrays and
>>loops to generate moves, a la TCSP.
>>
>>So where does the magic of bitboards come alive?  It's certainly not in my case.
>>
>>Cheers,
>>
>>Mike.
>
>I have answered this before.  It "comes alive" after you learn how to use the
>idea.  Two months isn't nearly enough time.  Until you think "bit parallel" you
>write a traditional program using an ineffecient data structure.  Once you get
>into bitboards, you begin to find faster or alternative ways to do thing...



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.