Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:59:33 11/20/02
Go up one level in this thread
On November 20, 2002 at 04:00:20, Dan Andersson wrote: >>Actually, at least for the case of Crafty and Yace, there is a good basis for >>comparison. They are relatively equal in playing strength. So any advantage in >>bitboards over arrays or vice-versa would seem to be _very_ minimal, which is >>what I have generally claimed for 32 bit machines... >> >The problem with that position are many. But one fundamental flaw is that they >may use different extension and pruning conditions. Thus they might look at >trees that are wildly different. And the rough equality of playing strength may >have no more than a tangential relation with whatever data representation is >used. > >MvH Dan Andersson Why does this matter? The point is that a bitmap program and a non-bitmap program are playing with equal skill. If you want to take the position that one of the programmers is very good and the other is very bad, that's ok. I know my programming skill. I can't speak for anybody else. So that leaves us at "yace is poorly written and Crafty is well-written so the comparison is invalid." I don't buy that... I simply think that on the x86 architecture, the two approaches are equivalent. Fritz seems to support that contention.
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.