Author: rasjid chan
Date: 21:18:09 04/09/04
Go up one level in this thread
On April 09, 2004 at 15:24:11, Steffan Westcott wrote: >On April 09, 2004 at 14:49:28, rasjid chan wrote: > >>On April 09, 2004 at 14:32:43, Sune Fischer wrote: >> >>>If speed is not an issue, have you considered to use fillers directly? >>> >> >>>These are pretty handy to have around for other things, especially fillup and >>>filldown is something I use a lot. >> >>I don't know exactly, but i guess there are not many variations or optimizations >>possible for bitwise operations on bitboards. I did read >>earlier threats that discuss ray extentions and cutoff and that's >>what I use from commonsense. > > >Rasjid, > >You may find this old post of mine of interest : >http://chessprogramming.org/cccsearch/ccc.php?art_id=261956 > >There I describe how to generate sliding attacks for the whole board at once, >which take into account rays occluded (cut short) by occupied squares. No tables >are used at all, the result is by direct calculation. > >In general, I try to minimize use of square indices in the body of bitboard >manipulation code, as they are a different representation. Also, I minimize >serialization of single bits ie. I avoid use of bitscan as much as possible. > >Cheers, >Steffan I have saved your articles and will see if ever anyone could squeeze more than what nature is willing to give. My initial impression of bitboards is naural limitations and I use them only in special situations, not like in move generations. Rasjid
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.