Author: Pham Minh Tri
Date: 22:01:58 03/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 07, 2001 at 01:03:40, Pham Minh Tri wrote: >On March 06, 2001 at 10:39:05, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On March 05, 2001 at 23:57:05, Pham Minh Tri wrote: >> >>>Hi Dr. Hyatt, >>> >>>I am studying your RootMoveList function and wondering if its method of ordering >>>could be replaced by calling Quiesce function. >>> >>>I mean the value for ordering could compute simply as following: >>> >>> value = -Quiesce(tree,-MATE-1,MATE+1,ChangeSide(wtm),INCPLY,1); >>> >>>(need not call Evaluation and EnPrise functions) >>>Could it work with the same result? Do I miss something? >>> >>>Thank in advance for your advice, >>>Pham >> >>Probably would work find. Might take a bit longer to sort the move list >>since that quiesce() call could be quite complex. The question is, would the >>probably more accurate move ordering offset the cost, or not? > >But this is the fastest (and little diffirent, if someone need :) ) way to try >your idea. I will try it now. Thank you very much. I have tried it. It works and saves me 1/4 of search nodes and time. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR EVERYTHING. Pham
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.