Author: Russell Reagan
Date: 20:29:36 01/29/03
http://members.home.nl/matador/chess840.htm#INTRO
From Ed's page...
switch (piece_type) { case 0 : goto empty;
case 1 : goto white_pawn; // evaluate white pawn
case 2 : goto white_knight; // evaluate white knight
case 3 : goto white_bishop;
case 4 : goto white_rook;
case 5 : goto white_queen;
case 6 : goto white_king;
case 7 : goto black_pawn; // evaluate black pawn
case 8 : goto black_knight;
case 9 : goto black_bishop;
case 10 : goto black_rook;
case 11 : goto black_queen;
case 12 : goto black_king; }
On one portion of Ed's discussion of Rebel (see above), he talks about using
"indirect addressing". I get the impression from Ed's words that this method is
supposed to fast. I understand his discussion to mean that if you create a
switch statement like he does, you create a jump table and avoid a bunch of
conditionals.
However, in past discussions, I recall hearing that using a function pointer is
going to be at least as slow as conditional, so I asked someone, and was told
that Ed's example should be no different than using a function pointer or
virtual functions.
Ed talks about this method as if it is a good thing to use. So what is the
advantage of it? Either someone is mistaken, or Ed and the guy I talked to are
talking about different things.
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.