Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 15:59:25 07/22/03
Go up one level in this thread
On July 22, 2003 at 18:24:38, Bob Durrett wrote: > >If all chess engines utilize their hash tables in much the same way, might there >be some benefit in standardizing the tables and standardizing the way data is >stored in them? Could a way be found to switch engines but keep the same hash >table and it's contents? Heck no man, you're dreaming. Even in the astronomicly unlikely event that programmers would agree on a common format, ask yourself why *your* program should trust some junk data from another program. And why would you settle for a dumber public implementation than the top tuned monster you've developed yourself? >In software such as Chessbase 8, one may have dozens of engines and these >engines can readily be switched during analysis of a given position or game. It >seems possibly convenient if the findings of one engine might be usable by the >next. On the other hand, maybe it would complicate the pruning strategy? You bet. Forget it, you can't reuse this data, it's not portable. -S. >Could this be done without getting into Matt's instability issue? > >Bob D.
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.