Path: ...!feed.opticnetworks.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic Subject: Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0 Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 08:12:45 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 102 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 25 Jun 2024 15:12:45 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="422dd2162c45ab1a09b084523bb5ca66"; logging-data="1659707"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18rRkdmxnsT1amBGmxS5LEj" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:uOVhK89DBUL8t1WC29Bw4fa6ktU= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Bytes: 4864 On 6/25/2024 7:08 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: > Op 24.jun.2024 om 23:04 schreef olcott: >> On 6/24/2024 2:36 PM, joes wrote: >>> Am Mon, 24 Jun 2024 08:48:19 -0500 schrieb olcott: >>>> On 6/24/2024 2:37 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>> On 2024-06-23 13:17:27 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>> On 6/23/2024 3:22 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>> That code is not from the mentined trace file. In that file _DDD() >>>>>>> is at the addresses 2093..20a4. According to the trace no >>>>>>> instruction >>>>>>> at the address is executed (because that address points to the last >>>>>>> byte of a three byte instruction. >>>>>> >>>>>> In order to make my examples I must edit the code and this changes >>>>>> the >>>>>> addresses of some functions. >>>>> >>>>> Why do you need to make an example when you already have one in the >>>>> file mentioned in the subject line? >>>>> >>>> I had to make a few more examples such as HH1(DD,DD) >>> AFACT HH1 is the same as HH0, right? What happens when HH1 tries to >>> simulate a function DD1 that only calls HH1? >>> >> >> typedef uint32_t u32; >> u32 H(u32 P, u32 I); >> >> int P(u32 x) >> { >>    int Halt_Status = H(x, x); >>    if (Halt_Status) >>      HERE: goto HERE; >>    return Halt_Status; >> } >> >> int main() >> { >>    H(P,P); >> } >> >> I am going to have to go through my code and standardize my names. >> H(P,P) was the original name. Then I had to make a one parameter >> version, a version that is identical to H, except P does not call >> it and then versions using different algorithms. People have never >> been able to understand the different algorithm. >> >> typedef void (*ptr)(); >> typedef int (*ptr2)(); >> int  HH(ptr2 P, ptr2 I); // used with int D(ptr2 P) that calls HH >> int HH1(ptr2 P, ptr2 I); // used with int D(ptr2 P) that calls HH >> int  HHH(ptr P);         // used with void DDD() that calls HHH >> int HHH1(ptr P);         // used with void DDD() that calls HHH >> >> *The different algorithm version has been deprecated* >> int  H(ptr2 , ptr2 I);  // used with int D(ptr2 P) that calls H >> int H1(ptr2 P, ptr2 I); // used with int D(ptr2 P) that calls H >> >> *It is much easier for people to see the infinite recursion* >> *behavior pattern when they see it actually cycle through the* >> *same instructions twice* > > Twice is not equal to infinitely. When will you see that? > It is strange that you call that an infinite recursion, when H aborts > after two cycles and the simulated H cannot reach its own abort > operation, because it is aborted when it had only one more cycle to go. > None of the aborted simulations would cycle more than twice, so infinite > recursion is not seen for an H that aborts the simulation of itself. typedef void (*ptr)(); int H0(ptr P); void DDD() { H0(DDD); } int main() { H0(DDD); } _DDD() [00002172] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping [00002173] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call H0(DDD) [0000217f] 83c404 add esp,+04 [00002182] 5d pop ebp [00002183] c3 ret Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] The call from DDD to H0(DDD) when DDD is correctly emulated by H0 cannot possibly return. Until you acknowledge this is true, this is the only thing that I am willing to talk to you about. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer