Author: Robert Hyatt
Date: 07:12:09 08/11/99
Go up one level in this thread
On August 11, 1999 at 03:35:12, Bernhard Bauer wrote: >On August 10, 1999 at 12:00:07, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On August 10, 1999 at 10:44:49, Bernhard Bauer wrote: >> >>>On August 10, 1999 at 10:24:30, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>> >>>>On August 10, 1999 at 02:25:56, Bernhard Bauer wrote: >>>> >>>>>On August 09, 1999 at 12:24:56, Robert Hyatt wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>On August 09, 1999 at 10:02:42, Bernhard Bauer wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>Hallo, >>>>>>> >>>>>>>recently I came across a position from a game >>>>>>>Haenninnen - Szabo, Wageningen. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The position is >>>>>>>FEN: 3r1rk/pp1q2b/3p2pp/PP1Np2n/2Pp1p/B2P2Pb/3QPPBP/R4RK w >>>>>>> >>>>>>>The game went on >>>>>>>19. Bxd6 Bxg2 >>>>>>>20. Bxf8 Qh3 >>>>>>>21. Bxg7 f3 >>>>>>>22. exf3 Bxf3 >>>>>>>23. Ne3 Kg7 >>>>>>>24. Qb4 Rd7 >>>>>>>25. Ra2 Nf6 >>>>>>>White resigned. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Programs have difficulties to find out that 19. Bxd6 is bad. >>>>>>>The whole line seems to be difficult at least for Crafty. >>>>>>>BTW Crafty produces a lot of debug messages on a Sun, not on a PC. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>Enjoy >>>>>>>Bernhard >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>>What is "a lot of debug messages"? If you are getting oddball error messages >>>>>>then something is definitely wrong... >>>>>> >>>>>Messages like this: >>>>>captured a king >>>>>piece=5,from=51,to=44,captured=3 >>>>>ply=16 >>>>>My logfile is 5.2 Mb in size. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>>As far as the position goes, the end has a B on F3, Q on h3, which is a known >>>>>>"null-move" killer... >>>>> >>>>>Oh, not known to me. But I feared it would be a null move problem again -:) >>>>>Kind regards >>>>>Bernhard >>>> >>>> >>>>That is definitely bad. Such errors should never occur, and are only present >>>>to catch errors that I introduce when changing the code... Can you post a >>>>FEN for aposition that will produce such an error? >>> >>>Of course >>>FEN: 3r1rk/pp1q2b/3p2pp/PP1Np2n/2Pp1p/B2P2Pb/3QPPBP/R4RK w >>>See above. >>> >>>BTW the hardware is a Ultra Sparc with 2 procs. >>>fpversion gives: >>> A SPARC-based CPU is available. >>> CPU's clock rate appears to be approximately 166.8 MHz. >>> Kernel says CPU's clock rate is 168.0 MHz. >>> Kernel says main memory's clock rate is 84.0 MHz. >>> >>> Sun-4 floating-point controller version 0 found. >>> An UltraSPARC chip is available. >>> FPU's frequency appears to be approximately 170.5 MHz. >>> >>> Use "-xtarget=ultra" code-generation option. >>> >>>The OS is Solaris 7 from May 99. It's the 64-bit version. >>>The compiler is gcc2.95 >>> >>>Kind regards >>>Bernhard >> >> >>OK.. I overlooked that this was the same position discussed earlier. I ran this >>a bunch of times with no strange output at all. I'd guess that somehow the >>optimizations are going wrong... try compiling without the -O at all, and then >>run the same test. And keep adding optimizations back in until you do see the >>error. >> >>I ran with 1 cpu, 4 cpus, long and short search times, with none of that >>'captured a king' internal diagnostic error stuff at all... > >Here my results. >Without -O , but with assembler code Crafty produces "captured a kink". >Without -O , and without assembler code Crafty looks fine. >With -O3, and without assembler code Crafty dumps core from beginning. > >May be the Sparc assembler code does'nt fit my system, or somthing is wrong for >target=SUN, since Crafty runs well under WinNT. > >Kind regards >Bernhard For comparison, are you using the SUN option in the Makefile? Also, if you use the sparc assembly code, you _must_ use COMPACT_ATTACKS as the sparc assembly depends on that. A friend of mine is running a sparc version on an ultra-sparc 300, and isn't seeing this, although I am going to test your position on it to see if I see any errors...
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.