Author: Daniel Clausen
Date: 00:56:39 01/21/04
Go up one level in this thread
On January 20, 2004 at 12:55:58, Sune Fischer wrote: [snip] >You are not adressing the other issues, the termination stuff and the added >code. It's not the copy-cost that mainly keeps me from doing it. Now you must be joking, Sune. I mean a PV is basically a list of moves. Surely someone who's capable of building a chess program is able to fill a list of moves and terminate the list somehow? Btw: I plan to use the STL-container 'list' for this purpose. It's fast enough anyway and foolproof. (but then, terminating the list either with separate length-information or a NO_MOVE at the end of the list sound rather trivial too - to me :) >>>The fundamental principle in chess programming is never to do any work >>>that is not needed. Well, that's arguable a fundamental principle for any programming task. While I can see that a programmer of an amateur engine can say that 'I couldn't care less about the PV', it strikes me a bit odd that a programmer of a commercial engine does the same. Afterall the initial message clearly showed that customers would like to rely more on the PV than they currently can (in case of Shredder) Next thing you guys say is "don't display the score anymore! the only thing that counts is the played move!" :) [yes, I'm joking now :)] >>>That's why I think it is a bit silly to update a PV a few hundred times (in >>>particular in qsearch) and then only print it out the last one. What I find a bit silly in this discussion is that both you and Bob seem to be a bit stubborn in this discussion. (excuse me! :) One likes to have a useful PV whenever possible, the other couldn't care less. No need (for both of you) to hide behind technical details to defend your respective point. :) Sargon (hopes both don't gang up on him now :)
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.