[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [gnugo-devel] olib & xlib definition

From: Gunnar Farneback
Subject: Re: [gnugo-devel] olib & xlib definition
Date: Wed, 06 Feb 2002 17:49:16 +0100
User-agent: EMH/1.14.1 SEMI/1.14.3 (Ushinoya) FLIM/1.14.2 (Yagi-Nishiguchi) APEL/10.3 Emacs/20.7 (sparc-sun-solaris2.7) (with unibyte mode)

Trevor wrote:
> Ah, right, you haven't profiled the experimental pattern-based reading 
> patterns (and I wouldn't recommend it until my next patch!).  They
> use olib & xlib quite a lot (perhaps more than they should...)  That
> was my motivation for the change.  approxlib really is a lot faster
> than accurate_approxlib.

To begin with, all constraint expressions which are equivalent to
olib(*) <= 1, and these are quite a few, are really just asking the
question whether the move would be a self atari (including suicide).
This is most efficiently solved using the is_self_atari() function and
it should have its own autohelpers.

For the rest of the patterns outside read_attack.db I'm pretty sure
that the increased accuracy provided by accurate_approxlib() is worth
the cost. Compared to a reading constraint the speed difference
between approxlib() and accurate_approxlib() is rather trivial.

In read_attack.db it seems reasonable that the cost is too high
though, so there an approxlib() based autohelper would make more
sense. Regarding the naming, however, I think we should let xlib and
olib remain accurate and give different names to the approxlib() based


reply via email to

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