Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
Subject: DDD correctly simulated by HHH can't possibly reach its own "return"
 statement --- Liars on comp.theory
Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 14:36:33 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <103mrs1$ar3e$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 27 Jun 2025 21:36:34 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="a5e8bf149ad22c63d77dbd8bd904cd54";
	logging-data="355438"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/qQPrA6gi/it7ufarmVZfS"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:15RwKwWB8iMDNwTTltZkDRnqt9k=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250627-8, 6/27/2025), Outbound message
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean

I am only here for the validation of the behavior
of DDD correctly simulated by HHH.

I have included proof that the people on comp.theory
lied about this at the bottom.

typedef void (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);

void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}

int main()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   DDD();
}

Termination Analyzer HHH simulates its input until
it detects a non-terminating behavior pattern. When
HHH detects such a pattern it aborts its simulation
and returns 0.

On 6/27/2025 12:27 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
 > In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com
 > wrote:
 >
 >> I know that DDD .... simulated by HHH cannot
 >> possibly reach its own simulated "return" statement
 >> final halt state because the execution trace
 >> conclusively proves this.
 >
 > Everybody else knows this, too, and nobody has
 > said otherwise. *The conclusion is that the*
 > *simulation by HHH is incorrect*
 >

*That last sentence is an intentional falsehood*

-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer