From b0858877aeb0fc077526b04ef11a811b5b5b9e12 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Marco Costalba Date: Fri, 5 Feb 2010 17:37:33 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] Remove sorting optimization for many zeroes With negative history we don't have anymore a lot of zeroes to score, so just split moves in positives and non-positives sets. Speed up is almost zero, we cannot test speed directly because node count changed due to reorder, but I have verified sorting is correct. With a profiler I have seen we gain a little in sort_moves() and lose a little in insertion_sort(), so the net effect is almost zero, but code is simpler. No real change, just move reordering. Signed-off-by: Marco Costalba --- src/move.h | 26 +++----------------------- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 23 deletions(-) diff --git a/src/move.h b/src/move.h index 9702d9fb..71def812 100644 --- a/src/move.h +++ b/src/move.h @@ -86,8 +86,8 @@ inline void insertion_sort(T* firstMove, T* lastMove) } } -// Our dedicated sort in range [firstMove, lastMove), it is well -// tuned for non-captures where we have a lot of zero scored moves. +// Our dedicated sort in range [firstMove, lastMove), first splits +// positive scores from ramining then order seaprately the two sets. template inline void sort_moves(T* firstMove, T* lastMove) { @@ -114,28 +114,8 @@ inline void sort_moves(T* firstMove, T* lastMove) } while (p != d); - // Sort positives + // Sort positives and non-positives separately insertion_sort(firstMove, p); - - d = lastMove; - p--; - - // Split zero vs negatives - do { - while ((++p)->score == 0); - - if (p != d) - { - while (--d != p && d->score < 0); - - tmp = *p; - *p = *d; - *d = tmp; - } - - } while (p != d); - - // Sort negatives insertion_sort(p, lastMove); } -- 2.39.2