Author: Stefano Gemma
Date: 13:08:48 08/28/00
Go up one level in this thread
On August 25, 2000 at 07:36:17, leonid wrote: >>>On August 24, 2000 at 15:54:57, Stefano Gemma wrote: >>Have you tried www.linformatica.com? You should find the sources in the chess >>page. >Reached your page! Great graphics! Liked very much way all was put on the >screen. Changes of the levels and all basic fonctions. Alive picture that say >you that program is in thinking process is also well done. Thanks... they was good time... when i had having some free time to develop my chess program and design graphics ;-))) >I looked to your numbers. Today expect to go and to see Windows version. If I >did not mistake while seeing DOS version, between your two big numbers, one on >the right say total number of positions looked during the time when program was >thinking about its last move. You're right. One is the numebr of moves and the other one the number of nodes. > When I take this as the number of completely legal >moves numbers (even king's moves are legal) then it really shine. This number >goes neatly after the numbers that I see in one of mine searches. This one, in >my program, create all the legal moves before making its search for each ply. >Even your time is pretty close if I take your "level" as number of plies >indicated for brute force search. If I did no mistake, this could confirm that >finally all the program done in Assembler, never mind their way to thinking, >must reach finally very close numbers as positions/second. Consider that it is the old 16 bit version... the 32 bit version is more efficient. You can download Raffaela from my site, to see the Windows version (but without sources). >My impression is that your program need nothing more but time to reach every >possible level as best program. Initial speed is already there. I know, but i'm working in another direction, with the second version of Raffaela. But i'm working hardly to some commercial programs (not chess) and i cannot spend even a little time on it. I have to pay for the house and car ;-)))) [...] >>I've done ~3x in 16 bit... ~5x in 32 bit... i'm doing ~8x in the new version... >>you can do 20x, if you just want to do it ;-) All it needs is time... > >Will watch this. Actually I created my move generator some 6 years ago and >almost never came back for the last 4 years. It could be that different way of >implementing the move generator could produce much higher number of moves. Obviously a better implementation could give you the gain you're searching. I think that you have only to search for the simplest way to solve the problem of the moves generation... then you'll automatically write the faster engine (in assembly, obviously). >Was curious to see that you started your program (looked one of your description >in Italian) in July of 1993. This was the years when I started my program. In fact i have started the PC version in that period, but the algorithm was designed before. [...] >>>Are you using "on line Assembler" inside of C++? >>No at all. It is more flexible to use .asm sources. You have more controls. >Maybe you do your program in some kind of modules. Any asm sources is a module, as C sources are. Some other module contains macros and include files. Ciao!!!
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.