Author: Bruce Moreland
Date: 12:59:36 12/16/99
Go up one level in this thread
On December 16, 1999 at 13:19:04, Albert Silver wrote: >On December 16, 1999 at 00:47:53, Bruce Moreland wrote: > >>On December 15, 1999 at 19:12:19, Dan Ellwein wrote: >> >>>En-passant (if my understanding is correct) is a special case when a pawn >>>reaches the 5th rank and the opposing adjacent pawn moves two squares on its >>>first move. The pawn on the 5th rank then has the option (only on its next >>>move) to capture the opposing pawn as if it had moved only one square. If this >>>is the case, then en-passant would be considered as a normal capture covered >>>under 'Magnitude 1 - Capture Only'. In other words, the 'Movement' of the >>>capture of a Pawn(P) done by en-passant is the same as the 'Movement' of the >>>capture of a Pawn(P) done normally. >> >>I don't understand your categorizations then, or what you are trying to achieve. >> >>If you are making a list of cases you need to deal with when writing some sort >>of move generation and/or execution software, en-passant is definitely weird >>because you have to deal with a capture on a square that's not the destination >>square. > >That's true but I would have imagined it would be relatively easy to program. As >a player I basically treat it as two possibilities: >- The pawn is forward two squares. >- The pawn moved one square and I captured it. >Is programming it any different? None of it is hard to program, but it is an annoying special case that takes time and space in a critical part of the code. When you look at a move generator it is annoying how much is concerned with moves that take place rarely. bruce
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.