The assert:
assert(ttValue != VALUE_NONE);
Could fire for multiple reasons (although is very rare),
for instance after an IID we can have ttMove != MOVE_NONE
while ttValue is still set at VALUE_NONE.
But not only this, actually SMP is a source of corrupted
ttValue and anyhow we can detect the condition:
ttMove != MOVE_NONE && ttValue == VALUE_NONE
even north of IID.
Reported by Ronald de Man.
It is so rare that bench didn't change.
bench: 7710548
Remove from the search this special case and apply
null search and razoring also in mate positions.
Tested in no-regression mode and passed both
STC
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 65431 W: 10860 L: 10810 D: 43761
and LTC
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 34928 W: 4814 L: 4713 D: 25401
This patch kicks in only in mate positions and in
these cases it seems beneficial in finding mates
faster as Yery Spark measured on the Chest mate suite:
Total number of positions 6425
Fixed nodes 200K per position
master: 1049
new: 1154
And also the 5446 'hard' positions again with 2000K nodes
(those not found by both engines in 200K nodes):
master: 1069
new: 1395
bench: 7710548
It seems this flag is only for gcc and
yields a warning under OSX Mavericks:
clang: warning: argument unused during compilation: '-ansi'
No functional change.
Here MSVC is worried that
StepAttacksBB[PAWN][psq]
could overflow, so change psq initialization
to clarify psq is always less than 64.
No functional change.
Don't take the split lock if we don't have
available slaves (about 30-40% of times).
This new condition allows to retire the now
redundant one on number of threads.
No functional change.
Split previous patch in 2 steps: first remove
the MOVE_NULL hack, then retire nullChild.
The first step is a prerequisite
for second one and affects bench.
The second step (next patch) just removes nullChild
without affecting bench.
bench: 8205159
Are broken for big-endian case and
I have verified with MSVC 2013 Premium
bench is correct and there is no
miscompilation, so the main reason
to change the original code drops.
No functional change.
Another attempt at retiring current asymmetric
king evaluation and use a much simpler symmetric
one. As a good side effect we can avoid recalculating
eval after a null move.
Tested in no-regression mode and passed
STC
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 21580 W: 3752 L: 3632 D: 14196
LTC
LLR: 2.96 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 18253 W: 2593 L: 2469 D: 13191
And a LTC regression test against SF DD to
verify we don't have regression against
weaker engines due to some kind of 'contempt'
effect:
ELO: 54.69 +-2.1 (95%) LOS: 100.0%
Total: 40000 W: 11072 L: 4827 D: 24101
bench: 8205159
Before it was working by accident in case of
see_sign() and failing with see() due to how
castle moves are coded (king captures the rook).
Better to explicitly filter out castling moves
and use see() without any surprise/trick.
No functional case.
Book handling belongs to GUI, we kept this code
for historical reasons, but nowdays there is
really no need of this old, (mostly) unused
and especially incorrect designed functionality.
It is up to the GUI to choose the book (far easier for
the user) and to select the book parameters. In no
place, including fishtest, TCEC, rating lists, etc.
the "own book" is used, moreover currently SF is
released without any book and even if in the future we
bundle a book in the release package, it will be the GUI
that will take care of it.
This corrects a wrong design decision that Galurung
and later Stockfish inherited from what was common
practice many yeas ago.
No functional change.
There is really little that user can achieve (apart
from a weakened engine) tweaking these parameters
that are already tuned and have no immediate or visible
effect.
So better do not expose them to the user and avoid the
typical "What is the best setup for my machine?" kind of
question (by far the most common, by far the most useless).
No functional change.
To show perft numbers for each move. Just
use 'divide' instead of 'perft', for instance:
position startpos moves e2e4 e7e5
divide 4
Inspired by Ronald de Man.
No functional change.
Retire current asymmetric king evaluation
and use a much simpler symmetric one.
As a side effect retire the infamous
'Aggressiveness' and 'Cowardice' UCI
options.
Tested in no-regression mode,
Passed both STC
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 33855 W: 5863 L: 5764 D: 22228
And LTC
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [-3.00,1.00]
Total: 40571 W: 5852 L: 5760 D: 28959
bench: 8321835
At root we start counting plies from 1,
instead pv[] array starts from 0. So
the variable 'ply' we use in extract_pv_from_tt
to index pv[] is misnamed, indeed it is
not the real ply, but ply-1.
The fix is to leave ply name in extract_pv_from_tt
but assign it the correct start value and
consequentely change all the references to pv[].
Instead in insert_pv_in_tt it's simpler to rename
the misnamed 'ply' in 'idx'.
The off-by-one bug was unhidden when trying to use
'ply' for what it should have been, for instance in
this position:
position fen 8/6R1/8/3k4/8/8/8/2K5 w - - 0 1
at depth 24 mate line is erroneusly truncated due
to value_from_tt() using the wrong ply.
Spotted by Ronald de Man.
bench: 8732553
If razoring conditions are satisfied and
depth is low, then directly drop in qsearch.
Passed both STC
LLR: 2.98 (-2.94,2.94) [-1.50,4.50]
Total: 12914 W: 2345 L: 2208 D: 8361
And LTC
LLR: 2.95 (-2.94,2.94) [0.00,6.00]
Total: 50600 W: 7548 L: 7230 D: 35822
bench: 8739659
