Thanks Rémi, Earlier in that thread is a 9x9 version (Gmane does not like me, so I don't have a link).
Even though it is based on bitmaps, it also includes the standard union-find routine to identify the anchor. Path compression may or may not speed things up, you need to test it for your implementation. You also should test doing multiple dereference steps without equality checking (I chose 3 for maximum performance, this is because if's are expensive). Not performing path-compression has an advantage if you wish to support undo operations. René On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 9:35 AM, Rémi Coulom <[email protected]> wrote: > I found the code there: > http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.games.devel.go/20854 > > On 24 mai 2014, at 18:28, René van de Veerdonk < > [email protected]> wrote: > > > On Sat, May 24, 2014 at 4:34 AM, Erik van der Werf < > [email protected]> wrote: > >> I think a speed comparison for well optimized code using >> pure bit-boards (no liberties) against using pseudo-liberties (e.g., >> as in early versions of Lukasz Lew's libEGO) would be of some >> interest. >> > > I did just that a few years back and got to similar performance for 9x9, > whereas bitmaps were slower at 19x19. > Test-code and results can be found in the archives looking for bitmapgo or > alike. If the test-code is missing, > I can mail it out to those interested. > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go > > > > _______________________________________________ > Computer-go mailing list > [email protected] > http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go >
_______________________________________________ Computer-go mailing list [email protected] http://dvandva.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/computer-go
