-// Our dedicated sort in range [firstMove, lastMove), it is well
-// tuned for non-captures where we have a lot of zero scored moves.
-template<typename T>
-inline void sort_moves(T* firstMove, T* lastMove)
-{
- T tmp;
- T *p, *d;
-
- d = lastMove;
- p = firstMove - 1;
-
- d->score = -1; // right guard
-
- // Split positives vs non-positives
- do {
- while ((++p)->score > 0);
-
- if (p != d)
- {
- while (--d != p && d->score <= 0);
-
- tmp = *p;
- *p = *d;
- *d = tmp;
- }
-
- } while (p != d);
-
- // Sort positives
- insertion_sort<T>(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<T>(p, lastMove);
-}
-
-// Picks up the best move in range [curMove, lastMove), one per cycle.
-// It is faster then sorting all the moves in advance when moves are few,
-// as normally are the possible captures. Note that is not a stable alghoritm.
-template<typename T>
-inline T pick_best(T* curMove, T* lastMove)
-{
- T bestMove, tmp;
-
- bestMove = *curMove;
- while (++curMove != lastMove)
- {
- if (*curMove < bestMove)
- {
- tmp = *curMove;
- *curMove = bestMove;
- bestMove = tmp;
- }
- }
- return bestMove;
-}
-
-////
-//// Inline functions
-////
-