Author: Sune Fischer
Date: 00:36:59 05/30/04
Go up one level in this thread
On May 29, 2004 at 22:53:38, James Swafford wrote: >On May 29, 2004 at 16:09:22, Sune Fischer wrote: > >>On May 29, 2004 at 14:41:28, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >> >>>On May 29, 2004 at 14:26:55, Russell Reagan wrote: >>> >>>>On May 29, 2004 at 04:24:18, Tony Werten wrote: >>>> >>>>>Yes, you would have to hop to nextsquare to see how it would go from there. Now >>>>>you only have to look what square we are talking about, and if !nil, you will >>>>>always know that the nextsquare will be given at *sq++ >>>>> >>>>>So you basicly made "nextsq" and "location of nextsq" independant of each other, >>>>>thereby making it independant of board representation and making it more >>>>>efficient since you will be traveling through the array in a row, rather than >>>>>randomly accesed. >>>> >>>>Would this be any faster than a traditional array based move generator? As far >>>>as I can tell, the array based movegen will iterate over an array, while the >>>>move table approach loops over a linked list (effectively). Looping over an >>>>array will almost always be at least as fast as looping through a linked list, >>>>right? Plus the move table approach uses more memory to accomplish the same >>>>thing. You may get some other advantages from a move table approach, but with >>>>regard to speed, the move table approach doesn't seem like it would be the >>>>fastest. >>> >>>The magic of Vincent's generator is that there are almost no branches and >>>relatively little memory. The two biggest wastes of time in a modern deeply >>>pipelined superscalar processor are branch mispredictions and cache misses. >>> >>>anthony >> >>I really don't understand all the hype about a generator. >>I just had a look at a profile, mine spends something like 5% generating moves. >>That's hardly worth even looking at to optimize. >> >>It might be due to its incremental design that it's so fast though ;) >> >>Sorting the moves however, now that takes time. > >What type of sort do you use? How often do you sort your >move list(s)? I use SEE for the most part, expensive but seems to be well worth it. -S.
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.