Author: James Robertson
Date: 16:44:55 09/21/98
Go up one level in this thread
On September 21, 1998 at 19:33:18, John Coffey wrote: >>You should also have two hash tables, one with an "always overwrite" >replacement >>policy and another with a replacement policy based on depth. Almost everybody I >>know agrees that this is the best way to do things on a PC. > >When I studied hashing for other types of applications, the rule would be that >if you has two items with the same hash key, then you would store the second >in the next available empty slot. It is just a waste of time. Most tables will hold so few positions that there will be a lot of positions that could fill the same slot (i.e. have the same index), and since no position is of any more importance than any other position, there are no tangible rewards at all for doing this. >This requires more data to keep track of >where the next item is (could be a byte offset.) > >John Coffey
This page took 0.01 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.