Author: Bas Hamstra
Date: 10:38:58 01/14/03
Go up one level in this thread
>now: is it a good idea to keep the piece list sorted? I suppose it adds >complexity to the make/unmake functions. Bas says it helps MVV/MVA move >ordering, but I tend to believe that ordering moves based on MVV/LVA only is >not very good. Hi Rémi, In my BB program Tao, I have my captures 100% SEE sorted (some argue that this is overkill in case Defender > Attacker). Last time I tried to sort MVV/LVA in the qsearch in stead of SEE (while maintaing the skipping of SEE-wise losing captures) it reached about the same depth overall on a test-suite, but with a higher nps. So I think it's doable. Of course in the FW search you can not afford this, but in the qsearch, yes. And combined with a 1 capture at a time generator, it might give something extra, anyway this is what I am going to try. About the cost of keeping a sorted movelist: it slowed down make/unmake by 20%. I spend some time optimizing this. I even considered (and tried) high level C++ STL containers like multimaps and linked lists. They are interesting but slow, the current version does not use them. Best regards, Bas.
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.