Author: leonid
Date: 09:20:37 11/20/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 19, 1999 at 20:39:33, Antonio Dieguez wrote: >On November 19, 1999 at 14:58:41, leonid wrote: > >>On November 19, 1999 at 07:34:02, Antonio Dieguez wrote: >> >>>On November 18, 1999 at 18:13:12, leonid wrote: >>> >>>> >>>>>>>>So far as I could see, in my logic, it is not that much move generation that >>>>>>>>consume the most of the time but finding what move between the found one are >>>>>>>>legal. Until now, with exception of moves on the ply zero, my logic used only >>>>>>>>legal moves. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>thats a little rare, because not all moves are searched anyway. >>>> >>>>Actually, one illegal move can produce so many useless moves in the next ply >>>>that probably it have the sense to go with the legal moves since the beginning. >>>>At least, around 3 years ago, I find that in special logic for solving the >>>>problems (position with invitable mate) logic with illegal moves was around 30% >>>>more slower that with legal one. In positional logic I will try the illegal >>>>moves efficiency. I hope that your saying is well founded and I will reach more >>>>speedy logic. Expect start writing this tomorrow. >>> >>>I dont understand you perfectly and perhaps you didnt understand me too. >>> >>>The only thing I mentioned is that check stuff is checked one by one move. >>> >>>I guess that you generate the available moves without considering if the moves >>>leads the king in check right? and then before try the first you see if its >>>illegal because of checking the own king and then with the second and so on... >>>right? >>> >>>>>no, only the check comprobation is one by one, am sorry if I was not clear. >>>>> >>>>>>>I first see if the king is already in check, and if not, in nonking moves I see >>>>>>>if the king stay attacked only to the direction of the initial position of each >>>>>>>move, and in king moves, pawn and knight stuff and in all directions, all before >>>>>>>search with the new position of each move of course, one by one. >>>> >>>> >>>>If only your expression "initial position" must be read as initial position of >>>>the king, everything is clear for me. Our logics, that watch the legality of the >>>>moves for the pieces that are not the king, are very similar. Similarity is >>>>striking, but it is possible also that I am missing something. >>> >>>with "initial position" I was talking of the initial position of the piece >>>moved.For example after 1.e4 e5, the white king is not in check, and after we >>>generate the move list, let say the first move to try is 2.Be2, we see if the >>>king leads atacked to the direction of the initial position of that Bishop, I >>>mean we see f1 then g1 and stop, and nothing more.Let say other move we are >>>gonna try is 2.a4, in this move the initial position is a2, so we do not do >>>checking because a2 and e1 (king position) are not in the same line or >>>diagonal.In the king moves the thing is different.And a possible en passant >>>square is necessary to check it out too. >>> >>>I have not spoken about aliens, also. >>> >>>>Leonid. >>> >>>bye leonid, be well... >> >>I am a little bit lost in your explanation but maybe, still our logics are very >>close. Probably you see, like me, all the oportunities for "friendly king" to >>come under the fire, looking all the time initial position of "our king". This >>we need in order to generate all the legal moves for "our side". Are you saying >>just this, only given more details? > >hmm.. I think I was decently clear... :( >anyway how do you check for check? > >thanks. In the same way like finding the "legal moves". I had the impression that you was just saying this. After the "initial position" of your king you can see if he is immediately under the check, or when he could come under the fire if one of your pieces will remove the shelter that it provide. This is about finding the legality of each move. To find where your move will end by checking the ennemy king, you see the initial position of the ennemy king. After its position you can see what of your pices move can end by putting in check the opposit king. Practically in both cases you see from where "bishop fire", "rook fire"... could come, after the position of this or next king. I had the impression that you was saying just this. Right? Leonid. > >Antonio, (el novio por internet de blanca) Hablas de Antonio o de mi? Yo estoy ya casado con una morena. Leonid. > >>Regards, >>Leonid.
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.