Computer Chess Club Archives


Search

Terms

Messages

Subject: Re: Secret Opcodes

Author: Vincent Diepeveen

Date: 08:54:16 12/25/05

Go up one level in this thread


On December 25, 2005 at 11:39:12, Gerd Isenberg wrote:

>On December 25, 2005 at 11:08:45, Vincent Diepeveen wrote:
>
>>On December 25, 2005 at 10:27:34, Gerd Isenberg wrote:
>>
>>Hello Gerd,
>>
>>Please note that the lastname 'De Groot' is very common in chess. Like the name
>>'ye' in china or the name 'muh.
>>
>>But please realize this Frank de Groot is completely disturbed person.
>
>Aha - i didn't got the impression while reading.
>Found the "Secret Opcode" article quite amusing.
>
>Gerd

Please confuse this guy not with other De Groot's. There is many De Groot's in
computerchess actually. They are completely different persons. Not even family
from this guy. There is in fact other Frank de Groot persons who are in
computerchess. Don't confuse them with this go guy.

Vincent

p.s. for factorization or encrypting/decrypting whatever,
counting number of bits is not so interesting
more interesting is fast multiplication of numbers. that gets however
done also in *hardware* not in software. they use special chips for that.
such chips are a lot faster than you can do in software
for those applications. A single hardware chip is faster than teraflop
supercomputers.

so suppose i design a new factorization search using artificial intelligence,
then i'll have to convince some dudes there to get a funding and then they'll
put it in hardware. software is too slow for that.

it involves multiplying numbers a lot and sometimes modulo calculations.
That multiplying can be done for example with FFT.
that requires only multiplications, in hardware they use a different algorithm
than fft - i am not an expert in those respects, but bitcounting is not so
interesting.

requirements for chips are therefore interesting and i'll always shout for chips
with faster multiplication capabilities, but really for a pc processor a fast
popcount is just irrelevant.

for those applications hardware is so much faster than software, that there is
not even a discussion about software implementation of an algorithm. It's only
about how to get it in *hardware*.

>
>>
>>Vincent
>>
>>>Nice blog on "Evolution of a Go program" from Frank de Groot:
>>>http://www.moyogo.com/blog/blog.htm
>>>
>>>I found following article on popcount instruction particular interesting:
>>>http://www.moyogo.com/blog/2005/09/secret-opcodes.html
>>>
>>>The answer from Christian Ludloff on my question in sandpile forum some time ago
>>>is still a mystery to me:
>>>
>>>"PS: Don't call it POPCOUNT. The proper mnemonic would have BT
>>>at the beginning, though BTC is already taken..."
>>>
>>>Gerd



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.