Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 08:08:00 05/28/02
Go up one level in this thread
On May 28, 2002 at 10:45:10, Daniel Clausen wrote: >On May 28, 2002 at 09:30:48, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>"careless" :) > >Maybe that's not the appropriate word, but my native language is not English, so >please bear with me. :) Woohoo, welcome to the club. >>Hmm, I don't know. I need to extend ~100 plies(!!) to get a crash for a total >>of 200 plies search! Can you come up with any kind of position that would even >>slightly challenge this limit? > >I just "play it safe" in my engine. It's just a simple if-statement which most >likely costs almost nothing. I don't _have_ to think about what might happen in >some obscure position. :) I've learned that "I'm sure that this won't happen" >happens more than people think. Well its not something that I make a habbit of :) > >>I also have the maximum number of pseudo legal moves set to 255, this must be >>a potential bug too then? > >I think that the max number of legal moves is around 220. It's very well >possible that the number of pseudo legal moves is above 255. So to answer your >question: yes =) Hmmm 35 pins in one position I dare say must be impossible. >>Well I'm not going to check before adding a move if there is still room, call >>me careless if you must ;) > >Feel free. :) > >Hint: Another possibility would be to check at the end of movegen how many moves >you added in total. If your movegen gets a 'move_t *' and increments this >pointer each time you add a move, it's a simple subtraction to find out the >number of generated moves. (and an if-statement of course for the test :) Actually this is exactly how I do it :) but checking _after_ I add the move is too late, I need to check before adding, it is the adding that will crash it if array bounds are exceeded. >>These are the only known limitations I have, anything else shouldn't crash if >>the position is technical legal. > >[now getting real picky :)] > >If the position is technically illegal, your engine shouldn't accept it, >especially when it 'destroys' your internal data structures. > >Rule: When an application crashes because of user input, it's _always_ the >application's fault - one way or the other. > >Sargon (very picky today :) Yes, I do have some checks on the FEN, but I have not accounted for every possible broken fen possible. It's something I do plan to secure in the future, but its not very high on my list of priorities to be honest. -S.
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.