Author: Stuart Cracraft
Date: 18:22:43 12/28/05
Go up one level in this thread
On December 28, 2005 at 17:23:42, Roman Hartmann wrote: >On December 28, 2005 at 15:22:56, Roman Hartmann wrote: > >>I just added mobility to my eval and while it kills my kN/s (brought them from >>1000kN/s down to around 100kN/s) it doesn't seem to hurt the play. But I guess I >>have to let it play some games first before I make a conclusion. If it's >>improving the positional play without causing too much tactical dammage I will >>add a stripped down movegenerator for mobility as I have now quite some overhead >>having a legal-move-generator with incremental eval (means the eval is in the >>movegenerator). >> >>Thanks for your experiment. >> >>Roman > >Sometimes it would help a great deal to think about a problem first carefully >before actually writing any code. In the meantime I found a cheap workaround to >avoid to call my movegenerator at all from my eval. As I'm counting the moves >anyway I just save the number of moves in the actual position and the number of >moves in the previous position to get a mobility-factor. Doesn't cost me a thing >that way. > >Roman Agreed -- I learned the wrong way because so many people just threw code at problems rather than initially spent a day, week or month planning it out. Old habits die hard here. Stuart
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.