Re: [gnugo-devel] influence speed exactness tradeoff

[Gunnar Farneback]

Arend wrote:
> > I'm doubtful about this and also about the premise. Although there are
> > no explicit tests for KO_A and KO_B in the constraints, there's an
> > important distinction between "== WIN" and "!= 0".
> 
> Hmm. Is that distinction really that big? Of course, disallowing all
> illegal ko captures (which saves about 10% of reading nodes) is the same
> as changing "== WIN" to ">= KO_A".

I have written a number of constraints where the inclusion or
exclusion of ko results is important, yes.

> I missed that case with two one-point eyes though, I had only thought
> about sekis.  So I'd guess this it is not acceptable at all to disallow
> passes when testing owl_safe_move. For the owl pattern helpers, I still
> think it might be worth trying out.

A long time ago the tactical reading actually didn't allow passes. We
added it when we found out this problem. And I do think passes are
necessary also for owl pattern helpers.

/Gunnar