Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 09:14:59 09/22/03
Go up one level in this thread
On September 22, 2003 at 12:03:37, Bo Persson wrote: >On September 22, 2003 at 09:16:09, Vincent Diepeveen wrote: > >>On September 21, 2003 at 23:25:15, Edward Seid wrote: >> >>>On September 21, 2003 at 21:15:06, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>> A chess board is a good example of an object. There is >>>>no need to create a bunch of them, one is enough. I've personally seen more >>>>than one _really_ elegant OO (C++) chess program that was just as fast as >>>>mine (it was a bitboard program also). >>> >>>OK, so a chessboard is a good object for an OOP-oriented chess program. What >>>other things would be good to represent as objects? >>>For the chessboard and other objects, what would be the attributes and methods >>>of each object? >> >>all bullshit of course, global arrays is more interesting to use. > >CS101 Grade: F- > >>even in gnuchess 4.0 (before the crappy rewrite to bitboards) >> >>int board[64]; // sq_a1 = 0, sq_a2 = 8, sq_h7 = 63, values 1..6 for material >>int piecelist[2][16]; // having the squares for the pieces of each side >>int piececnt[2]; // number of pieces minus 1 >>int color[64]; // 0 = white, 1 = black, 2 = neutral >>int quickboard[64]; // 12 different pieces for color specific code >>int pindex[64]; // the index into piecelist >> >>etc. >> >>This is of course way easier and FASTER too than the bitboards stuff. > >What does bitboards have to do with objects? Your argument is hopeless. Before you know it it will also include NUMA architectures. :) > > >Bo Persson
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.