[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [Bug-gnubg] FW: Analysis Question

From: Christian Anthon
Subject: Re: [Bug-gnubg] FW: Analysis Question
Date: Thu, 3 Sep 2009 00:14:10 +0200

Wouldn't work. Suppose that you have a half made analysis and then
restart it. Since the move filter is not stored you would have to go
through the match and re-analyse at plies N-1 to make sure that all
moves are within the current filter. Time lost. And suppose that you
some moves are now outside the new filter. Should they then be

I guess that with a lot of jumping through hoops we could make this
work and half way consistent, but is it really worth it? What we do
now is at least consistent.


On Wed, Sep 2, 2009 at 11:22 PM, Michael Petch<address@hidden> wrote:
> I’ve been asked this by others. Personally I’m not sure I would change how
> it operates. If one knows this, its just as easy to clear the analysis and
> redo it. Just an opinion
> ------ Forwarded Message
> From: "address@hidden" <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, 2 Sep 2009 12:39:12 +0000
> To: Michael Petch <address@hidden>
> Subject: Analysis Question
> Hi Michael
> I part analyzed a match then stopped it as I wanted to increase the move
> filters.
> Saved settings and re-ran the analysis.
> Gnubg only analyzes at the larger filters from where the previous analysis
> finished.
> Is there a reason for this?
> Obviously it would be good if it added analysis for the extra moves included
> with the wider filters.
> _______________________________________________
> Bug-gnubg mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]