Author: Larry Griffiths
Date: 20:26:44 07/26/00
Go up one level in this thread
On July 26, 2000 at 22:29:07, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On July 25, 2000 at 22:04:28, Larry Griffiths wrote: > >>On July 24, 2000 at 21:28:49, Larry Griffiths wrote: >> >>My original Bruteforce for producing valid moves counts ran in 121 seconds. >>I implemented extracting all the captures at the next ply and searching >>thru them to find a king. I return if I find a king and adjust the move counts >>at the previous ply so that they will be correct. My counts match just like my >>original did... Except that it took 404 seconds! Is this the method that you >>use in Craft's perft command Bob? The only thing I can think to do is use my >>old method at the leaves of the tree... >> > > >I am getting confused here. Are we talking about an alpha/beta search, or >about 'perft' type testing? Let's define that before I answer more. I don't >try to optimize my perft results, I only use those for sanity checking the >move generator and board update code after major changes... > My BruteForce is another name for your 'perft'. I am writing another chess program from scratch and want to check the sanity of my move generation and board update code after major changes... :) >
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.