|
From: | Jonathan Kinsey |
Subject: | Re: [Bug-gnubg] Gnubg's Cache and Plies > 3 - problem? |
Date: | Wed, 2 Sep 2009 09:36:46 +0000 |
Michael Petch wrote: > > > On 01/09/09 10:26 PM, "Michael Petch" wrote: > > > On 01/09/09 5:22 PM, "Michael Petch" wrote: > > I haven’t provided the output, but I ran 0,1,2,3 plies (Same > filter and other settings). In those instances Cache Evals = No > Cached evals, which leads me to believe we still have an issue > with plies>3 with caching that hasn’t been discovered. I will > look at the code more tonight and if I see anything I’ll let > people know. My guess is we have missed something small > somewhere (I hope). > > > It appears we may be dealing with an optimization issue. Stay tuned. > > > > Its not optimizations. I can’t reproduce the problems now. I know there > is something that will cause it, I just don’t know what it was (So I am > positive there is a bug, I just can’t reproduce it). I am betting it has > to do with Pruning analysis options. > > On a side note can someone briefly explain “fTop” variable. There is an > inline comment in eval.c from a few years ago that fTop should be in the > cache but there were no available bits. Maybe it's a flag to show that it's the initial position being evaluated? I'm guessing because I haven't looked at the code in detail. Jon View your other email accounts from your Hotmail inbox. Add them now. |
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |