futility pruning - razoring

Discussion of chess software programming and technical issues.

Moderators: hgm, Rebel, chrisw

User avatar
Don
Posts: 5106
Joined: Tue Apr 29, 2008 4:27 pm

Re: futility pruning - razoring

Post by Don »

bob wrote: At the time of that discussion, 99% of the chess program authors extended to get out of check, rather than to extend when giving check. I think I was the first to extend when giving check, for that very reason. They sound the same, but they are not quite the same.
I have never extended the out of check moves. I have not been programming chess for as long as you have, but I think my first program was written in 1985.

That was way back in the last century. :-)

- Don
bob
Posts: 20943
Joined: Mon Feb 27, 2006 7:30 pm
Location: Birmingham, AL

Re: futility pruning - razoring

Post by bob »

Don wrote:
bob wrote: At the time of that discussion, 99% of the chess program authors extended to get out of check, rather than to extend when giving check. I think I was the first to extend when giving check, for that very reason. They sound the same, but they are not quite the same.
I have never extended the out of check moves. I have not been programming chess for as long as you have, but I think my first program was written in 1985.

That was way back in the last century. :-)

- Don
In the day, Cray Blitz, Belle, deep thought, chaos, laches, nuchess/chess 4.x, all extended when getting out of check. The only real effect of this is that you never get to the q-search when in check. But in those days, that did not matter, as at least in our case, the q-search was handled differently and we actually escaped check in the first 4 plies of the q-search anyway. It was a wash and probably more efficient to extend that way since the tree was a bit smaller.