Author: Severi Salminen
Date: 00:23:12 12/07/01
Go up one level in this thread
>I disagree that it is wiser. > >Chest that is the best mate solver when the target is to find the shortest mate >also generates only legal moves. When I said wiser, I meant wiser if you make a chess playing program. But of course there are maybe applications where make()/unmake() should be as fast as possible, instead of movegen(). > Like I said, I did a perft 5 in one second (on my Celeron300) if I >>didn't actually make()/unmake() the last ply - so I also claim to be the fastest >>free program :) This is because my movegen() is very fast for the cost of a >>slower make(). > >Your movegen is very fast because you generate illegal move so you practically >do not do perft 5 in one second. I generate illegal moves only at the last ply. But, this is beginning to be quite useless: this is only about defining perft command and we do it differently. I do what crafty does (logically) and you do something different. But if you define it as reporting only the right number of nodes, then you could be the fastest - don't know who else has done it that way. >I do not say that I will use the fastest perft that I can get for a chess >program. > >trying to calculate perft as fast as possible and trying to play chess well are >2 different tasks but knowing to do one better can also help to know to do the >second better. Definitely true. But the bad thing is that perft might be leading to wrong direction, as it emphasizes (well, in the way Crafty does perft, at least) the speed of make()/unmake(). And in real chess it is the other way around. Severi
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.