Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: For Andrew Wagner - Thanks

Author: Andrew Wagner

Date: 14:09:53 04/26/04

Go up one level in this thread


On April 26, 2004 at 14:02:58, Dan Honeycutt wrote:

>Andrew:
>You cost me a lot of work.  After your post re Fine#70 I carefully reread all my
>code, single stepped everything and still couldn't find the problem.  So I
>scrapped my entire hash code and rewrote it using a two part table modelled
>after Pepito.  The other thing I did that Pepito does: in debug mode every store
>does a probe to make sure that what just went in to the hash table is what comes
>out.  That brought several bugs to light right away.  Took a little longer to
>discover that storing a negative depth caused a blowup.
>
>Bruja now finds Kb1! with better than +2 score in about 130k nodes.  I've just
>started testing but results look good - new hash leads old hash 14-9.  Thanks
>for your post and I hope you have had success with Trueno.
>
>Dan H.


Hi Dan. Glad to hear you're getting good results now. I'm still having some
troubles with Trueno, but I just found a big bug, so maybe I'm heading in the
same direction. Can you possibly give some more details on this debug test
you're doing? I'm not sure I'm following that. And when you talk about storing a
negative depth...that's from null-move reduction I assume? I hadn't thought of
that, I should check that. Thanks! Andrew



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.