RE: [gnugo-devel] Reading patch

[Evan Berggren Daniel]

On Sun, 23 Feb 2003, Portela Fernand wrote:

> Evan wrote:
>
> > I agree, it's a good thing.  This should be completely equivalent to
> > evan_3_10.4b in functionality, but that was rejected for speed reasons.
>
> I'm not sure I recall correctly, but wasn't it the patch which tried to
> make attack_either() and defend_both() call eachother recursively ?
> In this case, it seems to me that your patch was actually different and
> somewhat more ambitious.

You're right...  seems I can't remember my own patches ;)

I'm not sure why your patch would be slower than the one I had, then...
presumably because we use attack_either more now?

Also, using the candidate move macros is probably cleaner and more
extensible.

Evan Daniel