Author: Rafael Andrist
Date: 03:06:41 12/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On December 23, 2002 at 05:46:26, Uri Blass wrote: >I did not learn most of the source code in crafty and I am afraid that if I try >to change something that I do not understand I may have bugs(I have bugs even >when I try to change something that I understand). I also did not learn the code of crafty, I only looked at the EGTB and the Nullmove implementation and nothing more. But I had no problems to understand these things and even without knowing the complete context. I guess your ideas are mainly search-related and therefore they should not be too difficult to implement - you don't need to know how Crafty's evaluation and move generation works in detail if you do that. >I guess that I may get more positive responses also if I improve movei and make >it better in tactics than crafty(It is already better than crafty in many >positions inspite of not using hash tables in an efficient way). It is always encouraging when the program is better in some positions, but this doesn't mean anything about the real playing strength. >It may be better for the long run if I do like miguel and start by changing the >source code without improvements to do it more easy to read but doing it better >is a task that seems to be more interesting for me. This is surely a good idea, also detailed comments in the code are useful for you, when forget what some lines of your code do. (And this can happen, I made this experience when gooing through my modified EGTB access code) regards Rafael B. Andrist
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.