Author: Matthias Gemuh
Date: 06:29:04 03/19/03
Go up one level in this thread
On March 19, 2003 at 08:28:02, Ricardo Gibert wrote: >On March 19, 2003 at 06:33:01, Matthias Gemuh wrote: > >>I decided to stop chess programming but even the latest version of my program >>sucks. How can I quit in peace? >>It calculates this attack information (bitboards of attackers to 64 squares) >> BITBOARD AttacksTo[64] >>from scratch at each node. I tried to do this incremementally and it quickly got >>messy and buggy because of sliding pieces, castle, en passant. >>How do you attack attack boards (even the conventional type)? >> >>/Matthias. > > >Let me share a couple of observations I have made concerning the development of >amateur chess programs. > >The 1st big mistake I see repeatedly is being in too much of a rush make their >programs strong by adding "fancy stuff." A very simple program can be fairly >strong (> 2200 elo). You just need to get the fundamental things to work right >*first*. Gerbil is a good example of what is possible with a reasonably simple >program (about 2400 ICC rating). Don't layer the "fancy stuff" on top of the >incorrectly implemented fundamental stuff. Hi Ricardo, I, indeed, do layer "fancy stuff" on junk :). That explains why my prog scores a miserable 260/300 WAC at 5sec/pos on 1.8GHz. BTW, my prog (BigLion) is at least 5 times slower than Gerbil, but equal in strength at 1 minute/move. If I should ever come back to chess programming, I think I would follow your instructions. I just want to correct my fancy stuff now (my evaluation function depends heavily on it). Thanks, Matthias.
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.