Author: Dan Newman
Date: 11:31:19 05/03/00
Go up one level in this thread
On May 02, 2000 at 21:29:46, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On May 02, 2000 at 20:35:09, William Bryant wrote: > >>In my program my killer table is simply an array of [ply][2] with two killers >>allowed per ply. When updating the killer table, I replace the first killer >>with the new one (assuming it is not the same move), and move the old first >>killer to the second killer position, dropping what ever move is in the second >>killer position. >> >>In the introductory paragraphs of Ernst's book, he describes using counters >>to order the killer moves (page 23) >>"The killer moves carry "hit" counters with them which specify their priorities >>for sorting and replacement." >> >>This would, of course, require a larger table, and more time spent updating >>and sorting the killer table. >> >>Is this more efficient or effective than a standard replace table? Other >>thoughts or comments about organizing the killer moves? >> >>Thanks. >> >>William >>wbryant@ix.netcom.com > > >I use counters... I think this is the right way to do this... Bob, I just looked at Crafty v17.10 (to see if and where you zero the counters) and didn't see them. I suspect you got rid of the counters when you went SMP (otherwise you'd have to do some locking to keep the counters and moves coherent, I suppose). [I've been zeroing the counters in my program in the wrong spot I think...] -Dan.
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.