Author: Uri Blass
Date: 03:59:06 01/08/03
Go up one level in this thread
On January 08, 2003 at 05:20:33, Tony Werten wrote: >On January 08, 2003 at 05:12:07, Ed Schröder wrote: > >>On January 08, 2003 at 03:53:24, Tony Werten wrote: >> >>>On January 08, 2003 at 03:28:26, Steve Maughan wrote: >>> >>>>Ed, >>>> >>>>The 'penny drops'! Seriously good trick! >>>> >>>>So I can see that this is potentially a replacement for SEE (and more). Have >>>>you any idea if it is faster than SEE - what percentage of CPU time is taken up >>>>with this type of board scanning? My gut feel is that it'll probably be a >>>>little slower but contain more knowledge >> >>>Depends I think. If you want to use it only for ordering captures, there is not >>>a lot of difference. >>>If you want to use it in eval to loop over the board and see who is controling >>>each square, it's a winner. Also for finding who's controling the squares around >>>the king it's very nice. >> >>You got it. I do hope you understand the downside too? It's a total rewrite of >>your program :) > >No it isn't :) It's a speedup. > >But I'm really not looking forward to figuring out the way to fill the status >table :( So if you could publish that one first ;) ( Or send it by email ) > >Tony I also feel the same as you. For me it is not speed up simply because I do not have the relevant information and but I believe that the value of the new information is bigger than the cost. I do not use bitboard and I have my attack tables but they are not efficient in generating the information about controlling squares. Uri
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.