Author: Uri Blass
Date: 21:03:18 11/20/04
Go up one level in this thread
On November 20, 2004 at 23:18:19, Daniel Shawul wrote: >On November 20, 2004 at 22:33:26, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On November 19, 2004 at 23:15:44, Daniel Shawul wrote: >> >>>On November 19, 2004 at 11:28:34, Anthony Cozzie wrote: >>> >>>>Well, I also did a pretty complicated algorithm, and I designed my own. If you >>>>borrowed someone else's things might go easier for you, although I think that >>>>takes a lot of the fun out of it. >>> >>> Did you create your complicated algorithm ,after sitting back and thinking? >>>Well if that is the case you are more Genius! >> >> >>This is >> >>(a) silly; >> >>(b) poor programming >> >>You do _not_ start writing code and then try to figure out how it is going to >>work. Any good software engineering textbook/course will show you this. Coding >>is the _final_ part of the development effort, not the first. Otherwise the >>effort is multiplied by a factor of X, where X is large. As is the testing and >>debugging multiplied also... >> > Have you read what i wrote down below before replying to this message? >I said if you are going to create something , you should have something to >work on. For example it is hard for me to work/think on how i should split >search,when i don't have something to test my ideas on. You know that >chess is all about testing. something you never expected to work works when >testing and vice versa. I do not think that chess is all about testing. testing is important but it is important to understand why something that you expected to work does not work. > However i also agree i have to have some kind of design for parallel search >splitting. In my opionon , you can start coding everything up to the point you >start splitting (where the real sciece of parallel search comes). As i said >before in previous message, the thing before that is all about programming >skill,nothing special. collect your global data,create/destroy >threads,lock/unlock etc. I do not know nothing about parallel search and I have no idea how to do the things that you describe. In my case I do not use threads and I cannot even design something more simple like making a program that analyze 2 games at the same time with different threads. I think that some simple program that only analyze 2 games at the same time may be productive for programmers as first step for parallel search. I also think that at least as long as movei is weaker than Crafty19.15 I can expect at least 100 elo improvement in one year without parallel search so spending time on parallel search is not a good idea because getting 100 elo improvement is more important than implementing parallel search and I am not optimistic about implementing parallel search with no bugs in one year when I start from having a lot of global variables that are bad for parallel search and knowing nothing about threads. Uri
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.