Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Attack Tables

Author: Roberto Waldteufel

Date: 00:12:32 10/22/98

Go up one level in this thread



On October 21, 1998 at 04:28:43, Ernst A. Heinz wrote:

>On October 20, 1998 at 18:13:24, Robert Hyatt wrote:
>>
>>The main idea of rotated bitmaps is that it eliminates that incremental >updating
>>of the attack bitmaps as pieces are moved.
>
>If I understood Roberto correctly, he is primarily concerned about the full
>"attack tables" which is obviously different from what you call "attack
>bitmaps". Without incremental updating the whole bitboard stuff (normal &
>rotated) allows *only* for the quick detection of the "attack-from" relation,
>i.e., which squares does a piece attack when it resides on location X. The
>bitboard stuff answers this question by means of pre-computed attack bitboards
>and some masking operations to account for other pieces on the board.
>
>Unfortunately, however, the bitboard stuff does not fundamentally simplify the
>calculation of the "attack-to" relation (i.e., which pieces attack location X).
>Without incrementally updated "attack-to" tables you still need to loop in
>order to determine the relation. As usual it therefore depends on your specific
>program if incrementally updated "attack-to" tables are to be preferred or not.
>
>=Ernst=

Hi Ernst,

Yes, you see my dilemma. At present my incremental updating is very fast on the
attack-from maps, but slower on the attack-to maps. I think this is also the
case with attack detection using the rotated bitboards and no attack tables. I
intend to try the rotated bitboard method to see if I can make the search
faster. Only trouble is, my present code uses the attack tables everywhere, so
it will be a big job to rewrite it for the new data structure.

Best wishes,
Roberto



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.