Author: Dan Homan
Date: 10:15:32 02/11/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 11, 2000 at 11:51:31, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >On February 11, 2000 at 09:19:04, Dan Homan wrote: > >>It just recently occurred to me that anything I am doing with piece lists >>I can do with bitboards but faster and more efficiently. I am beginning >>to wonder if there is any reason not to have bitboards (even if one doesn't >>want to use them fully - ie rotated bitboard move generation). > >With piece lists, you can just look at the next element in the array and get the >square # of the next piece. > >With a bitmap, you have to create a copy of the bitmap with your pieces. Then >you have to repeatedly find the first bit of that bitmap and clear it. Good point. - Dan > >The former is obviously much faster, even if you are running on a 64-bit >computer. > >(I'm not saying that bitmaps are bad. I'm just saying that there are obvious >disadvantages.) > >-Tom
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.