-/// MovePicker::score_captures(), MovePicker::score_noncaptures(),
-/// MovePicker::score_evasions() and MovePicker::score_qcaptures() assign a
-/// numerical move ordering score to each move in a move list. The moves
-/// with highest scores will be picked first by pick_move_from_list().
-
-void MovePicker::score_captures() {
- // Winning and equal captures in the main search are ordered by MVV/LVA.
- // 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
- // 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.
- // In main search we want to push captures with negative SEE values to
- // badCaptures[] array, but instead of doing it now we delay till when
- // the move has been picked up in pick_move_from_list(), this way we save
- // some SEE calls in case we get a cutoff (idea from Pablo Vazquez).
- Move m;
-
- // Use MVV/LVA ordering
- for (int i = 0; i < numOfMoves; i++)
- {
- m = moves[i].move;
- if (move_is_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)));
- }
-}
-
-void MovePicker::score_noncaptures() {
- // First score by history, when no history is available then use
- // piece/square tables values. This seems to be better then a
- // random choice when we don't have an history for any move.
- Piece piece;
- Square from, to;
- int hs;
-
- for (int i = 0; i < numOfMoves; i++)
- {
- from = move_from(moves[i].move);
- to = move_to(moves[i].move);
- piece = pos.piece_on(from);
- hs = H.move_ordering_score(piece, to);