Author: Inmann Werner
Date: 06:27:18 03/20/99
Go up one level in this thread
Hello. After sleeping about it and going again on to the problem, I found out, that most of you are right and want to thank for your suggestions!!! 1) Making the new code, I started an old bug to work. In Hash adressing, it is important, that hash size is something like 2^x (65536,131072,262144....) I did exactly this but with one error. To make the Hash you have to do something like Hashadress=hashsize & hashindex. And here, hashsize has to be one less than above (65535,131071....). the "-1" dropped out because of the new code. Before, I had a special define for it, what now was obsolete. After this bug,the lack only is about 3 to 5 %. I do not understand, why it worked better on my Cyrix. Maybe another "test bug"? Please excuse me, to have worried you!!!! 2) Robert is right. Using structures increases again, but not much. Now I only have a lack of 1% to 2%. I think, I can live with it, cause on my Cyrix, the code "new" now is faster than the old one. This must have to do with processor architecture..... I am really no profi in this. Excuse again. Yesterday I really was worried. I checked the code often, what I changed. But I did not think, that an old bug will get started, because of the new thing. Hashing really is a "hot" and very "fragile" thing! Werner
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.