Author: Mark Higgins
Date: 02:38:53 08/03/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 03, 1999 at 05:25:52, Ed Schröder wrote: >>Posted by leonid on August 02, 1999 at 21:23:37: >> >>>IMHO low-brain fast-searches like DB vs Kasparov have proved it is better to >>>forget about trouble makers and exceptions and just go for the brute force >>>approach. Fast and dumb rules. Forget about exceptions they are waste of >>>time. >>>You spend all clock cycles and programmer time on worrying about >>>exceptions and then you are full of bugs. >>> >>>Ciao >>> >>>Mark >>> >>> >>>> >>>>And because of today's fast computers the exceptions fade away as for >>>>example the Cray Blitz position is seen by Rebel in 0.5 second. >>>> >>>>Ed Schroder >> >>I really agree with what was said obove. Now on very quick computers Rebel >>10 can see by "brute force" 6 plys ahead in just one or two seconds. Some >>less superficial revision of the moves but with "fixed horizon" can lead up >>to 10 or even 12 plys deep. This way of searching the move is best >>that some other method that care too much about exceptions. Exceptions >>that take that much space to care about and can produce anyway very >>suspicious result. >> >>Leonid. > >I do not agree with was has been said above except what has been said >by myself of course :-) > >If you have a commercial program and playing a 40/2:00 game for instance >you can not afford to think 6 minutes (or worse) on a simple recapture as >people are going to laugh on the stupidness of the silicon. > >So you are forced to come up with some intelligent software that handles >forced moves. This means you are going to have to deal with all the >exceptions. No choice. Is it not true that as soon as you deal with one exception another one comes along? Where does it all end? A great tangled mass of spaghetti. Ciao Mark > >Ed Schroder
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.