Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Yes!!! (for the sake of clarity)

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 06:26:45 10/17/00

Go up one level in this thread


On October 16, 2000 at 15:51:30, Carlos del Cacho wrote:

>Okay, I've coded only one chess program for the time being and it's bitboard
>based (with little programming experience). Personally I don't think it is that
>hard to get it going and you won't get more trouble to debug it than with other
>move generation systems. But besides speed bitboards are great because you can
>do a lot of things with a simple popcnt function and bitwise operators. You get
>clearer code, in my opinion.
>
>Greets,
>Carlos del Cacho
>
>Pepito's Homepage: www.crosswinds.net/~pepitochess

you have a cool example in crafty. basically crafty is written
in a brilliant way: all kind of assembly functions and other functions
are called using functions instead of direct inline hacking.

Without the clear example i'm sure it would get complete chaos.

GNUchess 4.0 and before
is an example of a cool example of how ideas should work, but
it's about the worst example of how one should program.





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.