TalkChess.com

Hi, my engine seems to be in agreement with JetChess: rnbqkb1r/pp1p1ppp/2p5/4P3/2B5/8/PPP1NnPP/RNBQK2R w KQkq - 0 6 _______________________________ | |///| |///| |///| |///| | r | n | b | q | k | b | | r | |___|___|___|___|___|___|___|___| |///| |///| |///| |///| | | p | p | | p | | p | p | p | |___...

and I strenuously object to your disrespectful treatment of Milos, a very smart guy, currently part of IBM research group... you (and others and we all know to whom i'm referring) have called him 'idiot' (and worse) on many occasions...simply because you disagree What are you talking about? I certa...

OK, you have almost convinced me that lazy eval just won't work in a program with big eval scores for king safety and pawn structure. However, it seems to me that we should still get the usual gain in nodes per second, even if the increased size and inaccuracy of the tree makes it a bad deal. But w...

OK, you have almost convinced me that lazy eval just won't work in a program with big eval scores for king safety and pawn structure. However, it seems to me that we should still get the usual gain in nodes per second, even if the increased size and inaccuracy of the tree makes it a bad deal. But w...

I am not quite sure what do you want exactly but maybe something like this? arguments: [t|d] [time in msec|depth] engine_path epdfile_path example: t 880 "C:/Program Files (x86)/Arena/Engines/critter/Critter_1.0_64bit.exe" "E:/work/chessprog/DATABASE/testy/LAPUCE2.EPD" #!/usr/bin/perl use IPC::Open2...

I added null moves to my program. Before trying any moves it evaluates the board position and sees if there an alpha beta cut off - if there is then it just doesn't bother going down that part of the tree. It seems to work but when it gets to end games (where it's loosing) then it sees any move as ...

How does that compare to qperft? Is frcperft-win64 really orders of magnitude faster than frcperft-win32? When I translate your time of 216 sec for perft(8) to perft(7), which should be some 30 times faster, it would be something like 7.5 sec. While I have 110 sec for frcperft-win32. Of course my m...

I have posted my latest version, which does not have the flag=0;, and uses separate routines (leaf_perft and move_count in stead of perft and move_gen) for the final ply (making it 25% faster). It might not optimally use the hash table for low-depth perfts, as it uses a sectioning of it optimized t...

Hola Pablo! I am sorry to say that frc-perft is MUCH slower than JetChess in my computer: while Perft(7) of starting position takes less than 9 seconds with JetChess, it took 80.89 seconds (!) with frc-perft. I do not know if I did something wrong. All the counters I have seen are good, but I prefe...

selectany wrote:Thanks

I didn't know about these built-in things.
I found even more suitable one: __builtin_ctzll.
Is it better to use it?

Surely, I did not take notice of this one. At least migration to 64bits will be effortless.