Author: Dann Corbit
Date: 17:06:57 12/05/03
Go up one level in this thread
On December 05, 2003 at 17:34:55, Matthias Gemuh wrote: >On December 05, 2003 at 16:43:15, Dann Corbit wrote: > >>On December 05, 2003 at 14:18:27, Georg v. Zimmermann wrote: >> >>>Hi, >>> >>>just had a little idea and was wondering whether anyone of you is doing that. >>>When in check there are obviously two ways to generate moves, either flip >>>through all pieces and see whether they can capture attacker/ move in between, >>>or flip through the in-between squares and see whether pieces can move there. >>>Now usually b) will be faster. But in some positions when the attacker is far >>>aways from the king and few pieces are left, a) will be faster. I wonder if >>>someone has 2 versions and uses a) or b) depending on the board situation ? It >>>is an insignificant gain in an insignificant function, I know. But still ... >> >>I have a bitmap of every square (whether occupied by white or black) that is >>attacked by white, and also every square (whether occupied by white or black) >>that is attacked by black. >> >>Incheck(white) is just kingbitmap[white] & blackattacks >>Incheck(black) is just kingbitmap[black] & whiteattacks >> >>It's also useful for other things like move ordering. > > > >That is how I do it in BigLion. >I calculate these attack boards from scratch at each interior or leaf node. >Do you do it better ? You can do it incrementally. It's a lot trickier to get it right though.
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.