Path: ...!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as non-halting V2 ---woefully mistaken rebuttal Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 10:20:58 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 56 Message-ID: References: <210383b2ee318f68a96d94aec314ee8b93f79b7f@i2pn2.org> <2eecnR6fa9XiWzz7nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <9KOcnbAqLvwnID_7nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <9651ca7a4eb67c679e7058b8b6f824ac693c11cf@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 26 Jul 2024 17:20:58 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="98ef4f11d97010b63c53911c6d37ff8b"; logging-data="3045654"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/fS9hR0tQ2jZdxeFQqHk6+" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:YZlmk0WeVDb8NcZ8UXBU6GD8fIM= In-Reply-To: <9651ca7a4eb67c679e7058b8b6f824ac693c11cf@i2pn2.org> Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 4787 On 7/26/2024 10:13 AM, joes wrote: > Am Fri, 26 Jul 2024 08:54:32 -0500 schrieb olcott: >> On 7/26/2024 3:50 AM, joes wrote: >>> Am Thu, 25 Jul 2024 23:25:59 -0500 schrieb olcott: >>>> On 7/25/2024 10:35 PM, Mike Terry wrote: >>>>> On 26/07/2024 01:53, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 7/25/2024 4:03 PM, Mike Terry wrote: >>>>>>> On 25/07/2024 14:56, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/24/2024 10:29 PM, Mike Terry wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 23/07/2024 14:31, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 7/23/2024 1:32 AM, 0 wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-07-22 13:46:21 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/22/2024 2:57 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-07-21 13:34:40 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/21/2024 4:34 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-07-20 13:11:03 +0000, olcott said: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/20/2024 3:21 AM, Mikko wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2024-07-19 14:08:24 +0000, olcott said: > >>>>>>>>>> In this case we have two x86utm machines that are identical >>>>>>>>>> except that DDD calls HHH and DDD does not call HHH1. >>> I don't see how the outside use of a function can influence it. > >> Then we know that HHH can see the the first four instructions of DDD >> have no conditional code that could prevent them from endlessly >> repeating. > True, but HHH does have a conditional abort. It should be coded to > recognise that, because one knows that at compile time already. > >>>>> The relative addressing is to be expected as a difference, and is >>>>> fine provided the actual target is the same. [Which it seems to >>>>> be...] >>>>> The whole thing with the slave instances might well be where the bug >>>>> lies!  That would be slightly funny, as I pointed out that problem on >>>>> some completely unrelated post, and this could be a follow-on issue >>>>> where it has caused observable misbehavior in the code.  (Needs a bit >>>>> more investigation...) >>>> There never is any actual bug with the simulation. >>> I bet my nonexistent soul that there are bugs left in libx86. Apart >>> from that, your use of the library may be buggy. >> That is irrelevant. We can see by the execution trace of DDD emulated by >> HHH that this emulation does precisely match the semantics of the first >> four x86 machine language instructions of DDD. > But not what comes afterwards, and HHH makes the incorrect assumption > that another instance of itself wouldn't abort. > That it is beyond your technical competence to understand that unless the first HHH aborts then none of them do is less than no rebuttal at all. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer