Author: Uri Blass
Date: 15:15:35 05/03/03
Go up one level in this thread
On May 03, 2003 at 08:55:33, Magoo wrote: >On May 03, 2003 at 08:26:05, Uri Blass wrote: > >>On May 03, 2003 at 08:07:31, Magoo wrote: >> >>>On May 03, 2003 at 02:47:29, Tony Werten wrote: >>> >>>>On May 02, 2003 at 22:05:25, Magoo wrote: >>>> >>>>>How bad is this: >>>>>Depth:3, Nodes:99949, Time:40 sec, Nps:2498 >>>> >>>>Horrible, sorry. >>>> >>>>From the speed you get (Nps) I guess you are doing too much/ doing things >>>>double. My program is not fast, but still 100x times faster. >>>> >>>>Profiling your code should show up where the problems are. You could also post >>>>the structure of your program here, we might be able to help. >>>> >>>>Good luck, >>>> >>>>Tony >>> >>>I did a profile (for a minmax walk depth=3), im using a 0x88 board, i try to >>>program with alot of "modules", that means i have small functions for almost >>>everything. The function get_piece is called approx 300times/node, which seems >>>resonable, on_board is the !(square & 0x88) test. >>I do not know what get_piece does but >>I do not think that calling one function 300 times/node is reasonable. >> >>If get_piece find the next piece then there is no reason for a special function >>and you can use your piece list. >> >>Even without piece list I see no reason to call get_piece so many times. >>There are not 300 pieces in the board. >> >>Uri > >No, this is what it does: get_piece(board brd, int sqr) -> piece, >it takes a pointer to a board and returns the piece on square sqr. >When moving say a Bishop, you have it on square src, i call >get_piece(brd,src-15) to test if it can move to src-15 ( if get_piece returns >EMPTY, it can move there.. else i test for captures etc..). >Im guessing, that doing all of this work is heavy, i mean calling a function 29 >Million times.. thats alot of parameter passing.. im going to test a few ugly >things (hard coding some stuff) to see if it improves... I can actually "remove" >both on_board and get_piece, i think that calling the function on_board is more >expensive than the function itselft, (the only thing it does is "return >!(square&0x88"). I have a lot of global varaibles in my program. local varaibles that are used by many functions is a bad idea because parameter passing takes time. A lot of my functions get no parameters and simply use global varaibles. I also told my program to inline every suitable function. 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.