Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Computer chess schools of thought

Author: Robert Hyatt

Date: 11:47:51 07/02/02

Go up one level in this thread


On July 02, 2002 at 12:31:15, Sune Fischer wrote:

>On July 02, 2002 at 09:55:19, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>
>>On July 01, 2002 at 06:50:51, Sune Fischer wrote:
>>
>>>On July 01, 2002 at 06:34:31, Richard Pijl wrote:
>>>
>>>>>I presume the reason for this is the slow InCheck implementation, so the idea is
>>>>>to call the heavy functions as little as possible.
>>>>
>>>>And search less nodes as you do not have to search the check evasions. I think
>>>>that is the real winner.
>>>
>>>Oh well I don't do that in qsearch. It just means that I might evaluate a
>>>position where the king is in check, but that's still better than to evaluate a
>>>position where the king has been captured, IMHO. :)
>>>
>>>-S.
>>
>>
>>Crafty won't do this.  Capturing the king results in a position that will
>>never be evaluated because when I generate captures and I notice I am
>>capturing a king, I instantly return(beta) from quiesce() which says "the
>>move at the previous ply sucks"...
>
>Okay, but you still evaluate while in check though.
>
>-S.


Yes I do.  But I do know that I will never reach a "leaf" position while
in check, because I extend at the ply where I give check, rather than extending
at the next ply after noticing I am "in check"...

Once I start making captures, however, you are certainly right that it might
stand pat in check.  It won't make illegal moves however...



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.