Author: Tom Kerrigan
Date: 23:58:42 02/12/00
Go up one level in this thread
On February 13, 2000 at 00:55:03, Andrew Dados wrote: >On February 12, 2000 at 22:37:50, Robert Hyatt wrote: > >>On February 11, 2000 at 18:10:57, Tom Kerrigan wrote: >> >>>On February 11, 2000 at 14:04:16, Andrew Dados wrote: >>> >>>>>As for holes in the piece list, I figured you could fill them up: >>>>That way your piecelist will not be preserved during search... while it does not >>>>have to, it introduces changes into, say, order of generated moves. I am not >>>>sure if I want that. >>> >>>I don't see why that's a big deal. The searches are still deterministic. >>> >>>-Tom >> >> >>It isn't really deterministic if you do hashing. Try fine 70 and fiddle with >>your move ordering to see this. >> >>But the main thing is that you _must_ be able to produce identical node counts >>during testing... > >Also for LVA/MVV thing you need your piecelist sorted...so why scramble it? No, you just need to know what kind of piece the victim/attacker is. The reason for "scrambling" the piece list is obvious... so you don't have to check every entry to see if it's "dead"... -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.