Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 16:37:01 02/10/99
Go up one level in this thread
On February 10, 1999 at 15:19:40, James Robertson wrote: >Hi Mr. Moreland, > >Speaking of null moves: >My problems with the null move seem to be diminishing.... I added futility >pruning and several other improvements, and with every speed increase the null >move helps significantly more. I am hoping that by the time I add hash tables >and more pruning that I will get gains something like what you described. :) > >Thanks for you help. > >James If you put enough ketchup on it, anything is edible. Null move should work well right ouf of the box. I'm not convinced yet that you are bug-free. I suggest you add some #ifdef NULL_MOVE statements at the appropriate locations, and try your new code with null move turned on and off. It's very possible that all you are doing is hiding the problem. You should see a big difference with null move on and off. You sent me some code in the mail. I looked at it a bit, but I haven't replied to your email yet. Since I presume you are reading this, I'll tell you one thing here: "short" is the data-type of Satan. It is way better to use "int" at every possible opportunity, if you are talking about a Pentium-type machine running 32-bit code. bruce
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.