Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Mikko Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Proof that DDD specifies non-halting behavior --- point by point Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 13:22:16 +0300 Organization: - Lines: 28 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 15 Aug 2024 12:22:17 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="12fc9c697b40d6367e6f93c8d12f250c"; logging-data="985969"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19R1y77vaYI4+vasEDvDOmf" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:Km9cluBwMw+omy7VDIC5eAhOoFM= Bytes: 1782 On 2024-08-14 13:06:27 +0000, olcott said: > On 8/14/2024 3:17 AM, Mikko wrote: >> On 2024-08-14 00:52:36 +0000, olcott said: >> >>> void DDD() >>> { >>>    HHH(DDD); >>>    return; >>> } >> >> In order to prove that the above specifies a non-halting behavour >> you must prove that HHH(DDD) does not terminate. > > Wrong. At least the proof that DDD does not terminate also proves as an intermedate result or an obvious corollary that HHH does not halt. Non-halting means that an infinite number of instructions can be executed without halting. That means that at least one instruction is executed infinitely many times as there are only finitely many instructions. But not instrunctions of DDD outside HHH is executed infinitely many times. -- Mikko