Author: Uri Blass
Date: 08:01:30 09/10/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 10, 2003 at 10:23:15, Tim Foden wrote:
>On September 10, 2003 at 10:04:24, Uri Blass wrote:
>
>>On September 10, 2003 at 09:19:25, Tim Foden wrote:
>>
>>>Hi Uri,
>>>
>>>In GLC I probe the pawn hash tables every time Evaluate is called (it is probed
>>>from withing the Evaluate code). Evaluate is currently only called from the
>>>q-search.
>>>
>>>Cheers, Tim.
>>
>>I still think that it is a waste of time and maybe it is better to keep a global
>>varaible that tells me if to probe the pawn hash tables only when make move
>>does not change the pawn structure.
>>
>>At the end of makemove after I already decided if to probe or not to probe
>>I should have
>>HaveToProbe=0;
>>
>>In unmakemove I should have
>>if (pawn structure was changed)
>>HaveToProbe=1;
>>
>>When HaveToPtobe=0 in the beginning of makemove
>>I can probe only when the pawn structure is changed and in other cases I
>>alwaysprobe in makemove.
>>
>>Uri
>
>Well, I guess it depends what you do whan you probe.
>
>E.G. Given something like this (made up so I accept there could be bugs :)...
>
>struct PawnHashRec
>{
> unsigned __in64 m_pawnHash;
>
> // other fields in pawn hash record here...
>};
>
>static unsigned __int64 s_pawnHash; // this is kept up-to-date my makemove()
>static PawnHashRec s_pawnProbe;
>static PawnHashRec s_pawnHashTable[PHASH_SIZE];
If I understand correctly it means that you remember the same information
twice(one time in s_pawnProbe and one time in s_pawnHashTable[PHASH_SIZE])
The question is if it is not better to read the information directly from the
arrays in s_pawnHashTable[PHASH_SIZE].
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.