On 01/09/09 10:26 PM, "Michael Petch" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > On 01/09/09 5:22 PM, "Michael Petch" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I haven¹t provided the output, but I ran 0,1,2,3 plies (Same filter and other >> settings). In those instances Cache Evals = No Cached evals, which leads me >> to believe we still have an issue with plies >3 with caching that hasn¹t >> been discovered. I will look at the code more tonight and if I see anything >> I¹ll let people know. My guess is we have missed something small somewhere >> (I hope). > > It appears we may be dealing with an optimization issue. Stay tuned. Its not optimizations. I can¹t reproduce the problems now. I know there is something that will cause it, I just don¹t know what it was (So I am positive there is a bug, I just can¹t reproduce it). I am betting it has to do with Pruning analysis options. On a side note can someone briefly explain ³fTop² variable. There is an inline comment in eval.c from a few years ago that fTop should be in the cache but there were no available bits.
_______________________________________________ Bug-gnubg mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnubg
