#include <cassert>
#include "history.h"
+#include "evaluate.h"
#include "movegen.h"
#include "movepick.h"
#include "search.h"
}
-
////
//// Functions
////
/// search captures, promotions and some checks) and about how important good
/// move ordering is at the current node.
-MovePicker::MovePicker(const Position& p, bool pvnode, Move ttm, Move mk,
- Move k1, Move k2, Depth d) : pos(p) {
- pvNode = pvnode;
+MovePicker::MovePicker(const Position& p, bool pv, Move ttm,
+ const SearchStack& ss, Depth d) : pos(p) {
+ pvNode = pv;
ttMove = ttm;
- mateKiller = (mk == ttm)? MOVE_NONE : mk;
- killer1 = k1;
- killer2 = k2;
+ mateKiller = (ss.mateKiller == ttm)? MOVE_NONE : ss.mateKiller;
+ killer1 = ss.killers[0];
+ killer2 = ss.killers[1];
depth = d;
movesPicked = 0;
numOfMoves = 0;
numOfBadCaptures = 0;
- dc = p.discovered_check_candidates(p.side_to_move());
if (p.is_check())
- phaseIndex = EvasionsPhaseIndex;
+ phaseIndex = EvasionsPhaseIndex;
else if (depth > Depth(0))
- phaseIndex = MainSearchPhaseIndex;
+ phaseIndex = MainSearchPhaseIndex;
else if (depth == Depth(0))
- phaseIndex = QsearchWithChecksPhaseIndex;
+ phaseIndex = QsearchWithChecksPhaseIndex;
else
- phaseIndex = QsearchWithoutChecksPhaseIndex;
+ phaseIndex = QsearchWithoutChecksPhaseIndex;
+
+ Color us = pos.side_to_move();
- pinned = p.pinned_pieces(p.side_to_move());
+ dc = p.discovered_check_candidates(us);
+ pinned = p.pinned_pieces(us);
finished = false;
}
assert(move_is_ok(mateKiller));
if (move_is_legal(pos, mateKiller, pinned))
return mateKiller;
- }
- break;
+ }
+ break;
case PH_GOOD_CAPTURES:
numOfMoves = generate_captures(pos, moves);
break;
case PH_BAD_CAPTURES:
- badCapturesPicked = 0;
+ movesPicked = 0;
break;
case PH_NONCAPTURES:
case PH_EVASIONS:
assert(pos.is_check());
- numOfMoves = generate_evasions(pos, moves);
+ numOfMoves = generate_evasions(pos, moves, pinned);
score_evasions();
movesPicked = 0;
break;
// Suprisingly, this appears to perform slightly better than SEE based
// move ordering. The reason is probably that in a position with a winning
// capture, capturing a more valuable (but sufficiently defended) piece
- // first usually doesn't hurt. The opponent will have to recapture, and
+ // first usually doesn't hurt. The opponent will have to recapture, and
// the hanging piece will still be hanging (except in the unusual cases
// where it is possible to recapture with the hanging piece). Exchanging
// big pieces before capturing a hanging piece probably helps to reduce
- // the subtree size. Instead of calculating SEE here to filter out
- // loosing captures, we delay the filtering in pick_move_from_list()
+ // the subtree size.
+ // While scoring captures it moves all captures with negative SEE values
+ // to the badCaptures[] array.
Move m;
+ int seeValue;
for (int i = 0; i < numOfMoves; i++)
{
m = moves[i].move;
- if (move_promotion(m))
- moves[i].score = QueenValueMidgame;
+ seeValue = pos.see(m);
+ if (seeValue >= 0)
+ {
+ if (move_promotion(m))
+ moves[i].score = QueenValueMidgame;
+ else
+ moves[i].score = int(pos.midgame_value_of_piece_on(move_to(m)))
+ -int(pos.type_of_piece_on(move_from(m)));
+ }
else
- moves[i].score = int(pos.midgame_value_of_piece_on(move_to(m)))
- -int(pos.type_of_piece_on(move_from(m)));
+ {
+ // Losing capture, move it to the badCaptures[] array
+ assert(numOfBadCaptures < 63);
+ moves[i].score = seeValue;
+ badCaptures[numOfBadCaptures++] = moves[i];
+ moves[i--] = moves[--numOfMoves];
+ }
}
}
else
hs = H.move_ordering_score(pos.piece_on(move_from(m)), m);
- // Ensure moves in history are always sorted as first
+ // Ensure history is always preferred to pst
if (hs > 0)
hs += 1000;
+ // pst based scoring
moves[i].score = hs + pos.mg_pst_delta(m);
}
}
-void MovePicker::score_evasions() {\r
-\r
- Move m;\r
- int hs;\r
-\r
- // Use MVV/LVA ordering\r
- for (int i = 0; i < numOfMoves; i++)\r
- {\r
- m = moves[i].move;\r
-\r
- if (m == ttMove)\r
- hs = 2*HistoryMax;\r
- else if (!pos.square_is_empty(move_to(m)))\r
- hs = int(pos.midgame_value_of_piece_on(move_to(m)))\r
- -int(pos.type_of_piece_on(move_from(m))) + HistoryMax;\r
- else\r
- hs = H.move_ordering_score(pos.piece_on(move_from(m)), m);\r
-\r
- moves[i].score = hs;\r
- }\r
+void MovePicker::score_evasions() {
+
+ for (int i = 0; i < numOfMoves; i++)
+ {
+ Move m = moves[i].move;
+ if (m == ttMove)
+ moves[i].score = 2*HistoryMax;
+ else if (!pos.square_is_empty(move_to(m)))
+ {
+ int seeScore = pos.see(m);
+ moves[i].score = (seeScore >= 0)? seeScore + HistoryMax : seeScore;
+ } else
+ moves[i].score = H.move_ordering_score(pos.piece_on(move_from(m)), m);
+ }
}
void MovePicker::score_qcaptures() {
/// find_best_index() loops across the moves and returns index of
/// the highest scored one.
-int MovePicker::find_best_index() {
+int MovePicker::find_best_index() const {
+
+ assert(movesPicked < numOfMoves);
- int bestScore = -10000000, bestIndex = -1;
+ int bestIndex = movesPicked;
+ int bestScore = moves[movesPicked].score;
- for (int i = movesPicked; i < numOfMoves; i++)
+ for (int i = movesPicked + 1; i < numOfMoves; i++)
if (moves[i].score > bestScore)
{
bestIndex = i;
/// from a list of generated moves (moves[] or badCaptures[], depending on
/// the current move generation phase). It takes care not to return the
/// transposition table move if that has already been serched previously.
-/// While picking captures in the PH_GOOD_CAPTURES phase (i.e. while picking
-/// non-losing captures in the main search), it moves all captures with
-/// negative SEE values to the badCaptures[] array.
Move MovePicker::pick_move_from_list() {
Move move;
switch (PhaseTable[phaseIndex]) {
+
case PH_GOOD_CAPTURES:
assert(!pos.is_check());
assert(movesPicked >= 0);
while (movesPicked < numOfMoves)
{
bestIndex = find_best_index();
-
- if (bestIndex != -1) // Found a possibly good capture
- {
- move = moves[bestIndex].move;
- int seeValue = pos.see(move);
- if (seeValue < 0)
- {
- // Losing capture, move it to the badCaptures[] array
- assert(numOfBadCaptures < 63);
- moves[bestIndex].score = seeValue;
- badCaptures[numOfBadCaptures++] = moves[bestIndex];
- moves[bestIndex] = moves[--numOfMoves];
- continue;
- }
- moves[bestIndex] = moves[movesPicked++];
- if ( move != ttMove
- && move != mateKiller
- && pos.pl_move_is_legal(move, pinned))
- return move;
- }
+ move = moves[bestIndex].move;
+ moves[bestIndex] = moves[movesPicked++];
+ if ( move != ttMove
+ && move != mateKiller
+ && pos.pl_move_is_legal(move, pinned))
+ return move;
}
break;
// been searched and it is not a PV node, we are probably failing low
// anyway, so we just pick the first move from the list.
bestIndex = (pvNode || movesPicked < 12) ? find_best_index() : movesPicked;
-
- if (bestIndex != -1)
- {
- move = moves[bestIndex].move;
- moves[bestIndex] = moves[movesPicked++];
- if ( move != ttMove
- && move != mateKiller
- && pos.pl_move_is_legal(move, pinned))
- return move;
- }
+ move = moves[bestIndex].move;
+ moves[bestIndex] = moves[movesPicked++];
+ if ( move != ttMove
+ && move != mateKiller
+ && pos.pl_move_is_legal(move, pinned))
+ return move;
}
break;
while (movesPicked < numOfMoves)
{
bestIndex = find_best_index();
-
- if (bestIndex != -1)
- {
- move = moves[bestIndex].move;
- moves[bestIndex] = moves[movesPicked++];
- return move;
- }
+ move = moves[bestIndex].move;
+ moves[bestIndex] = moves[movesPicked++];
+ return move;
}
break;
case PH_BAD_CAPTURES:
assert(!pos.is_check());
- assert(badCapturesPicked >= 0);
+ assert(movesPicked >= 0);
// It's probably a good idea to use SEE move ordering here, instead
// of just picking the first move. FIXME
- while (badCapturesPicked < numOfBadCaptures)
+ while (movesPicked < numOfBadCaptures)
{
- move = badCaptures[badCapturesPicked++].move;
+ move = badCaptures[movesPicked++].move;
if ( move != ttMove
&& move != mateKiller
&& pos.pl_move_is_legal(move, pinned))
while (movesPicked < numOfMoves)
{
bestIndex = (movesPicked < 4 ? find_best_index() : movesPicked);
-
- if (bestIndex != -1)
- {
- move = moves[bestIndex].move;
- moves[bestIndex] = moves[movesPicked++];
- // Remember to change the line below if we decide to hash the qsearch!
- // Maybe also postpone the legality check until after futility pruning?
- if (/* move != ttMove && */ pos.pl_move_is_legal(move, pinned))
- return move;
- }
+ move = moves[bestIndex].move;
+ moves[bestIndex] = moves[movesPicked++];
+ // Maybe postpone the legality check until after futility pruning?
+ if ( move != ttMove
+ && pos.pl_move_is_legal(move, pinned))
+ return move;
}
break;
while (movesPicked < numOfMoves)
{
move = moves[movesPicked++].move;
- // Remember to change the line below if we decide to hash the qsearch!
- if (/* move != ttMove && */ pos.pl_move_is_legal(move, pinned))
+ if ( move != ttMove
+ && pos.pl_move_is_legal(move, pinned))
return move;
}
break;
}
-/// MovePicker::current_move_type() returns the type of the just
-/// picked next move. It can be used in search to further differentiate
-/// according to the current move type: capture, non capture, escape, etc.
-MovePicker::MovegenPhase MovePicker::current_move_type() const {
-
- return PhaseTable[phaseIndex];
-}
-
-
/// MovePicker::init_phase_table() initializes the PhaseTable[],
/// MainSearchPhaseIndex, EvasionPhaseIndex, QsearchWithChecksPhaseIndex
-/// and QsearchWithoutChecksPhaseIndex variables. It is only called once
-/// during program startup, and never again while the program is running.
+/// and QsearchWithoutChecksPhaseIndex. It is only called once during
+/// program startup, and never again while the program is running.
void MovePicker::init_phase_table() {
// Quiescence search with checks
QsearchWithChecksPhaseIndex = i - 1;
+ PhaseTable[i++] = PH_TT_MOVE;
PhaseTable[i++] = PH_QCAPTURES;
PhaseTable[i++] = PH_QCHECKS;
PhaseTable[i++] = PH_STOP;
// Quiescence search without checks
QsearchWithoutChecksPhaseIndex = i - 1;
+ PhaseTable[i++] = PH_TT_MOVE;
PhaseTable[i++] = PH_QCAPTURES;
PhaseTable[i++] = PH_STOP;
}
projects / stockfish / blobdiff