Re: [gnugo-devel] on the road to 3.8

[Gunnar Farnebäck]

Joseph Piche wrote:
> With regard to bug #175, I have to agree that G5 on move 52 is
> awkward, and that a more appropriate move would be B8 or F1. However,
> after viewing output with -t -t, it looks like gnugo is choosing G5 to
> increase territory, even though Chinese rules are being used. Gnugo
> should see the territories at B8 and F1 as needing to be
> strengthened--which with the F1 territory, it does at endgame (which
> might actually be unnecessary.

F1 is safe and doesn't need defending, it's only strengthened as part of 
the --capture-all-dead process. B8 on the other hand seems necessary to 
avoid seki and that corner position should go into the seki test suite, 
cf. e.g. seki:901-913.

> I do admit though that I tested it under 3.7.10, not CVS. I haven't
> worked with CVS much, so could someone post the command I need to use
> to grab the source.

For instructions, see https://savannah.gnu.org/cvs/?group=gnugo

> With bug #160, I have run into this too at times. One possible (yet
> not very good) options is to add a flag and (maybe) gtp command for an
> individual move time limit, like --time-limit X or time_limit X, where
> if gnugo reached that limit when trying to decide a move, it would
> simply choose one sort of at random.

This is much harder than it sounds. GNU Go just doesn't have any 
infrastructure for aborting a search (or even the overall move 
generation) based on time limits or other external factors.

/Gunnar