Author: leonid
Date: 18:38:37 11/24/99
Go up one level in this thread
On November 24, 1999 at 20:24:20, Dave Gomboc wrote: >On November 24, 1999 at 19:32:04, leonid wrote: > >>On November 24, 1999 at 18:19:01, Robert Hyatt wrote: >> >>>On November 24, 1999 at 09:47:30, blass uri wrote: >>> >>>>On November 24, 1999 at 08:30:06, Jari Huikari wrote: >>>> >>>>>On November 22, 1999 at 19:05:13, leonid wrote: >>>>> >>>>>>Was puzzled few times by finding that many logics use illegal moves and >>>>>>succesfully. Until now I used this kind of moves only in the ply zero. Expect to >>>>>>rewrite my logic completelly with usage of illegal moves in every ply. >>>>> >>>>>This doesn't answer to your questions, but I decided to mention it anyway. >>>>>Am I alone or does someone else also generate only legal moves? >>>>> >>>>> Jari >>>> >>>>I remember karinsdad said that he decided to generate only legal moves because >>>>he cannot use ideas like the single reply extension if he generate illegal >>>>moves. >>> >>>That isn't necessary. I don't generate legal moves _unless_ I am in check >>>at the beginning of a ply. This lets me find the 1-legal-move positions, with- >>>out having to test for legality in 99% of the positions... >> >>Very interesting but not clear for me. Expression "at the beginning of the ply" >>mix me up. If king is under the fire in given position, you should find the >>moves for that ply where king is under the fire. All the moves that will be >>found for this ply are the same in this sense. Maybe I am missing here >>something, but what exactly? >> >>Leonid. > >When the king is in check, Crafty uses special code to generate only legal >moves. Otherwise, it generates psuedo-legal moves. Hope that clears things up. > >Dave Now it is clear. What make me feel confused is was the fact that logic for recognition that the king is under the fire takes (in my logic) almost as much time as recognition of the legality of all moves. It is possible that I mistaken in this sense, or the logic that see the check in Crafty is different and very efficent. Very interesting. Probably I should try to write the logic with illegal moves anyway. Will only wait for some other news on the matter. Thanks for response, 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.