Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 23:14:48 03/21/01
Go up one level in this thread
On March 21, 2001 at 13:25:04, Robert Hyatt wrote: >On March 20, 2001 at 11:23:20, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: > [deleted] >> >>At one point I will have to speed up my program somehow. My evaluation is >>still slim so I will need optimization to include more on it! >> >>Regards, >>Miguel >> >> > >Are you sure you are using the optimizer? Crafty is not a fast program, >so if you are 1/3 the speed of Crafty, it almost sounds like you are not >running the optimizer at all when you compile... > Unfortunately, I am sure. Maybe I am not using the best optimization with cygwin and djgpp, but I doubt I will gain more than 10% already. I tried several switches. I still have to include for instance pawn hashtables, change compiler, but... I must be doing something costly somewhere and It needs a serious profiling. I don't use assembler, it is just ANSI C. For what I saw, makemove takes sometime as well the generator but There is no obvious hot spot. It looks like everything is slow. I believe that the data structures I chose were not the most appropiate. I am using bitboards and maybe I should not update the attack bitboards for each piece in makemove but I need them for the next generation and the eval anyway... I found a way not to update them in unmakemove, and that helped a lot. A lot of work to do... Regards, Miguel PS: BTW, I include single-response to check extension and now WAC is solved 270/300 in 20s AMD K6-2 400 mhz (but WAC 250 blows up after finding mat8 I will have to implement fractional extensions. Thanks for the tips! > >
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.