[email protected] wrote on 09/03/2009 12:55:15:
> Øystein Johansen (OJOHANS) wrote: > >> Perhaps we should just disable the mt speed test, until > >> somebody fixes it. > >> > > > > Yes! Remove it until further. The speed test should be reworked > completely. Today it generates a random position and then evaluates > the position -- and repeats this. However, picking a random position > is quite strange since you seldom get anything else than contact > positions (Take a look at the generated positions, I dare you!). The > speed test should have a specified set of positions which represents > a typical match. > > > > -Øystein > > > Yes, we ought to have an analysed match, a few money games, and a few > rolled out positions for people to test speed and correctness on. Having something close to a non-regression test would be just great. First idea would be to have it embedded into gnubg's code, maybe as a python script. The current speed test (withot the bug) is fine enough to measure the eval speed (which is not the overall speed you can expect in a rollout). For example, it gives you quickly an idea of how much a -O0 build is slower than a -03 one. I'm more for fixing it and work on a separate non-regression part. MaX.
_______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
