Author: Bas Hamstra
Date: 02:01:51 10/17/00
Go up one level in this thread
On October 16, 2000 at 06:32:53, Pham Minh Tri wrote: >I know that Bitboard makes move generation the fastest, but this structure is >also one of the most complicated. However, an old post said that the generation >function is not the key of success to chess program and the author illustrated >that after his optimality (which made that function work much faster), the speed >of system increased only 1 percent. > >As a result, my question is: is bitboard really worthy for implementation when >it takes a long time to program and more time to fix all bugs (maybe several >times bigger than the rest of program)? Or is it better if we use this time to >concentrate on hash table, null move threshold and so on? I plan that I will >forget the bitboard (at least in the first period) if it help me only few >percent. > >Pham I am not sure is movegeneration using BB is the fastest. If you would compare only capture generation, it could be true. Non captures are SLOWER. I wouldn't expect big gains just by doing the BB datastructure. I see the following advantages: - It is fun to figure out - You can do nice eval things with very little code once you get used to them. It's not that this is so much faster (probably not at all) but compared to my previous program the eval is much easier to debug. Because you can express things clear and short, once you know you can rely on the "core" routines and bitmaps The disadvantage in my opinion is that BB is overall a little bit slower. But not very much. Bas Hamstra.
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.