Computer Chess Club Archives




Subject: Re: Differences between 0x88 ,10x12 and Bitboards!?

Author: Uri Blass

Date: 16:20:43 11/19/02

Go up one level in this thread

On November 19, 2002 at 18:14:46, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:

>On November 19, 2002 at 15:08:13, Daniel Clausen wrote:
>please mention me 1 bitboard program with a big eval.
>  *NONE*.
>To me bitboards seems something for people who are no good
>programmers, because they can cut'n paste from crafty and
>go further with that.
>Optimizing gnuchess or gerbil or whatever to something real
>fast for your needs is way more difficult of course than
>starting with something that's working and written out in
>Usually people also cut'n paste the SEE and qsearch from
>crafty then and they have something much better than they
>can produce in a lifetime most likely.
>That's the only attractive things from bitboards IMHO for
>several authors.
>And as long as they don't improve the evaluation a lot
>it remains like that.
>If on the other hand you look to what representation the
>good programmers go for, the picture is real clear.
>this has nothing to do with religion but with objective speed
>differences. My move generator without inline assembly and
>with general code for both sides, it is 2 times faster than
>crafty at any x86 processor.
>That's *objective* measurements.
>My SEE is better than the one from crafty, picking up more
>than Crafty does in the SEE. Very objectively provable.
>The list goes on and on.
>Most important thing however IMHO is that the source from
>crafty is free. If mine was free, everyone would start with
>DIEP and go further from there. I'm 100% sure of it.
>We saw this before.
>When GNUchess was the strongest freely available source code,
>people started with that crap.
>I wrote nearly every byte of my move generator. *every* byte.
>It took me years to make a fast generator. Not everyone is
>that great.

If you worked years on optimizing part of the program that you use less than 1%
of your time then it means that you are not a good programmer.

Good programmers prefer to optimize the important parts.

Working years to do your program 1% faster by a faster move generator seems to
me a big mistake.


This page took 0.04 seconds to execute

Last modified: Thu, 07 Jul 11 08:48:38 -0700

Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.