On Wed, Dec 03, 2008 at 09:55:07AM -0200, Mark Boon wrote: > I thought about that, but I was afraid the code would become too > obscure. After all, this is supposed to be a reference > implementation. But maybe I should actually give it a try to see what > it would look like.
I agree that the reference implementation should be maximally clear code. Performance is not all that important here, correctness is. Having said that, I can't help responding to one detail: > I had seen people write about memory usage of the tree, but never > understood the concerns. One thing to remember is that more memory use means more cache misses, and more access to the main memory. On modern computers, those can cost as much as executing a thousand instructions! So memory optimizing can often pay off, also with respect to time! Of course, Java does a lot of memory management behind the scenes, so optimizing such can be harder... But when writing in C or C++, it does make sense. -H -- Heikki Levanto "In Murphy We Turst" heikki (at) lsd (dot) dk _______________________________________________ computer-go mailing list computer-go@computer-go.org http://www.computer-go.org/mailman/listinfo/computer-go/
