Author: Miguel A. Ballicora
Date: 08:46:54 04/12/02
Go up one level in this thread
On April 12, 2002 at 11:08:10, Uri Blass wrote: >On April 12, 2002 at 10:57:40, Miguel A. Ballicora wrote: > >>On April 12, 2002 at 09:30:45, Uri Blass wrote: >> >>>On April 12, 2002 at 09:14:22, Oren Avraham wrote: >>> >>>>I've gone through the archive to look for a simple idea >>>>but found non: >>>>Why every ply should i generate the pseudomoves all over again, when i can >>>>"recycle" the old ones in some way or another. >>> >>>You do not have to generate the pseudomoves all over again. >>>I believe that programmers are usually not very good programmers >>>so they choose to do it because recycling >>>the old ones without bugs is too hard for them or takes >>>too much time that they prefer to invest time in other things >>>because they may get only a small speed improvement from >>>recycling the old moves. >> >>That is actually what a good programmer would do, not a bad one. >> >>Regards, >>Miguel > >No > >If you can implement idea that gives you 5% speed improvement >in 24 hours without bugs then I see no reason not to do it. What makes you think is 24 hrs? What makes you think is 5% improvement? What makes you think that you are guaranteed to have no bugs in 24 hrs? You also have to write debugging and testing code to implement this, _and_ test it. >The problem is that I believe that most if not all >the programmers simply canoot do it because they >are not good enough. Good programmers take good decisions. Those involves readability, flexibility, simplicity and good design. Curiously, speed comes as a consequence. Because if you have a program that is readable, flexible, simple with a good design you will be able to modify it quicker. Complexity could be good for tomorrow but terrible for the day after tomorrow. So, complex changes should be adopted if they are really worth it. If involves lack of flexibility, you might want to toss it out. Because the little % that you gain today, will get in your way in the next optimizations that you do next month. Or even worse, you won't even notice it. You might try a new ordering system and or a new selective idea and the 5% that you think you won now is -5% (but you dot test it anymore because the code become rigid since other things depend on that, so you do not know that you lost 5%). Coming to reusing the moves, I believe that the programmers do not use it because it is actually _slower_ (of course, this is IMHO). Not only that, I bet that the top chess programmers already thought about this and discarded it 1) some before trying because several considerations or because it was 100th in their priority list 2) some after trying. 3) some because their internal data structures are not suitable for this. Regards, Miguel >Uri
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.