Use the tail of moves[] array to store bad captures.
No functional change but some move reorder. Verified with old perft.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
This is the world's fussiest compiler with +w1
Warnings reported by Richard Lloyd.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Consider sligtly negative captures as good if at low
depth and far from beta.
After 999 games at 1+0
Mod vs Orig +169 =694 -136 +11 ELO
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
We can do this only when needed, if we get a cut-off
before we skip sorting entirely. This reduces sorting
time of about 20%.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Avoid to take the lock two times in a tight sequence, the first
in get_next_move() and the second to update sp->moves.
Do all with one lock and so retire the now useless locked version
of get_next_move().
Also fix some theorical race due to comparison sp->bestValue < sp->beta
is done out of lock protection. Finally fix another (harmless but time
waster) race that coudl occur because thread_should_stop() is also
called outside of lock protection.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Use the same scoring system used for evasions. Small if any
increase, but should be in at least for completeness.
After 999 games at 1+0
Mod vs Orig +208 =601 -190 +6 ELO
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
It is not useful becasue it is safe to call
get_next_move() multiple times when phase == PH_STOP
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
It is now no more needed to know dc candidates
inside MovePicker, so avoid calculating there.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
It is more clear that only in that case the move number is
correct, otherwise is only a partial quantity: the number of
moves of that phase.
In case of PH_EVASIONS instead we have only one phase.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Does not seem to improve on the standard, latest results
from Joona after 2040 games are negative:
Orig - Mod: 454 - 424 - 1162
And is more or less the same I got few days ago.
So revert for now.
Verified same functionality of 595a90dfd
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Use the same way of loop along the move list used for
the others move kinds so to be consistent in get_next_move()
And a bit of the usual clean up too, but just a bit.
It is even a bit (+0.3%) faster now. ;-)
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
This avoids calculating the array entry position
at each access and gives another boost of almost 1%.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
In MovePicker we get the next move with pick_move_from_list(),
then check if the return value is equal to MOVE_NONE and
in this case we update the state to the new phase.
This patch reorders the flow so that now from pick_move_from_list()
renamed get_next_move() we directly call go_next_phase() to
generate and sort the next bunch of moves when there are no more
move to try. This avoids to always check for pick_move_from_list()
returned value and the flow is more linear and natural.
Also use a local variable instead of a pointer dereferencing in a
time critical switch statement in get_next_move()
With this patch alone we have an incredible speed up of 3.2% !!!
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Original patch from Joona with added optimizations
by me.
Great cleanup of MovePicker with speed improvment of 1%
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
When ordering moves we push all captures with negative SEE values
to badCaptures[] array during the scoring phase.
This patch delays the costly SEE call up to when the move has been
picked up in pick_move_from_list(), this way we save some SEE calls
in case we get a cutoff.
It seems we have a speed gain of about 1-1.5 % in terms of nodes/sec
and profiling seems to confirm the small but real speed increase.
Idea from Pablo Vazquez on talkchess.com
http://www.talkchess.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=29018&start=20
It would be a no functional change but actually it is not because
now sorting set is different and so std::sort(), that is not a
stable sort, does not guarantees the order of same scored moves to
remain the same as before.
After 952 games at 1+0 we are below error bar, almost equal just
6 games of difference (+2 ELO)
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
This was needed by an old optimization in sorting of
non-captures that is now obsoleted by new std::sort()
approach.
Remove also the unused depth member data. Interestingly
this has always been unused since the Glaurung days.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
This is a first step for future patches and in
any case seems a nice thing to do.
No functional change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
In MovePicker consider killer moves as a separate
phase from non-capture picking.
Note that this change guarantees that killer1 is always
tried before killer2. Until now, because scoring difference
of the two moves was just 1 point, if psqt tables of killer1
gave a lower value then killer2, the latter was tried as first.
After 999 games at 1+0 we have
Mod vs Orig: +245 =527 -227 +6 ELO
Not a lot but patch is anyhow something worth to have.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Instead of a delayed selection sort so that the highest
score move is picked up from the list when needed, sort all
the moves up front just after score them.
Selection sort is O(n*n) while std::sort is O(n*log n), it
is true that delayed selection allows us to just pick the move
until a cut off occurs or up to a given limit (12), but with
an average of 30 non capture-moves delayed pick become slower
just after 5-6 moves and we now pick up to 12.
Profiling seem to prove this idea and movepick.cpp is now 10%
faster.
Also tests seem to confirm this:
After 700 games at 1+0: Mod vs Orig +178 -160 =362 +9 ELO
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
And upon reentering the same position try it as first.
Normally qsearch moves order is already very good, first move
is the cut off in almost 90% of cases. With this patch, we get
a cut off on TT move of 98%.
Another good side effect is that we don't generate captures
and/or checks when we already have a TT move.
Unfortunatly we found a TT move only in 1% of cases. So real
impact of this patch is relatively low.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Instead of just drop evaluation score after stand pat
logic save it in TT so to be reused if the same position
occurs again.
Note that we NEVER use the cached value apart to avoid an
evaluation call, in particulary we never return to caller
after a succesful tt hit.
To accomodate this a new value type VALUE_TYPE_EVAL has been
introduced so that ok_to_use_TT() always returns false.
With this patch we cut about 15% of total evaluation calls.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
It is slower the previous uglier but faster code.
So completely restore old one for now :-(
Just leave in the rework of status backup/restore in do_move().
We will cherry pick bits of previous work once we are sure
we have fixed the performance regression.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Does not seem to improve anything.
Anyhow idea is nice, maybe we still have to find
correct recipe.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
Add infrastructure to threat killer moves as a vector,
this will allow us to easily parametrize the number of
killer moves, instead of hardcode this value to two as is now.
This patch just add the infrastructure, no functional
change.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
It seems that "few moves" works because we extend the good
captures at the last ply of PV, so code it directly.
This version seems defenitly stronger then previous one.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
We have a regression somewhere here so restart from zero
and proceed one change at a time.
With this modification we have the same strenght of
"Introduce Stockfish" patch that is our strongest to date.
Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba <mcostalba@gmail.com>
