Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<32a0b6d30a6fd14b8558749c01badb0692661dcf@i2pn2.org> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: joes <noreply@example.org> Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant? Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 15:07:12 -0000 (UTC) Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <32a0b6d30a6fd14b8558749c01badb0692661dcf@i2pn2.org> References: <v5vkun$1b0k9$1@dont-email.me> <v60dci$1ib5p$1@dont-email.me> <v60red$1kr1q$2@dont-email.me> <v61hn7$1oec9$1@dont-email.me> <v61ipa$1og2o$2@dont-email.me> <v61jod$1oec9$2@dont-email.me> <v61leu$1p1uo$1@dont-email.me> <dd109397687b2f8e74c3e1e3d826772db8b65e40@i2pn2.org> <v62i31$21b7a$1@dont-email.me> <v632ta$23ohm$2@dont-email.me> <v63jej$26loi$6@dont-email.me> <v63s4h$28goi$2@dont-email.me> <v63s92$28dpi$3@dont-email.me> <v63t3r$28goi$6@dont-email.me> <v63tpd$28dpi$8@dont-email.me> <67a72a6769c3e0d96ba03aea4988153781ba01a0@i2pn2.org> <v665rb$2oun1$9@dont-email.me> <f808427bbd01195fa8ff6793e98c2ca162ac98de@i2pn2.org> <v668tr$2pc84$3@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2024 15:07:12 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="2138841"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM"; User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a git.gnome.org/pan2) X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Bytes: 4401 Lines: 53 Am Thu, 04 Jul 2024 08:43:22 -0500 schrieb olcott: > On 7/4/2024 8:38 AM, joes wrote: >> Am Thu, 04 Jul 2024 07:50:51 -0500 schrieb olcott: >>> On 7/4/2024 5:38 AM, joes wrote: >>>> Am Wed, 03 Jul 2024 11:21:01 -0500 schrieb olcott: >>>>> On 7/3/2024 11:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>> Op 03.jul.2024 om 17:55 schreef olcott: >>>>>>> On 7/3/2024 10:52 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>> Op 03.jul.2024 om 15:24 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>> On 7/3/2024 3:42 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>> Op 03.jul.2024 om 05:55 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2024 10:50 PM, joes wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> Am Tue, 02 Jul 2024 14:46:38 -0500 schrieb olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2024 2:17 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 02.jul.2024 om 21:00 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2024 1:42 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 02.jul.2024 om 14:22 schreef olcott: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 7/2/2024 3:22 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Op 02.jul.2024 om 03:25 schreef olcott: >> >>>>>>>> Similarly, if you think that HHH can simulate itself correctly, >>>>>>>> you are wrong. >>>>>>>> int H(ptr p, ptr i); >>>>>>>> int main() >>>>>>>> { >>>>>>>> return H(main, 0); >>>>>>>> } >>>>>>>> You showed that H returns, but that the simulation thinks it does >>>>>>>> not return. >>>>>>>> DDD is making it unnecessarily complex, but has the same problem. >>>>>>> main correctly emulated by H never stops running unless aborted. >>>>>> HHH is unable to simulate main correctly, because it unable to >>>>>> simulate itself correctly. >>>>>> The 'unless phrase' is misleading, because we are talking about a H >>>>>> *does* abort. Dreaming of one that does not abort, is irrelevant. >>>>>> The correctly simulated main would stop, because the simulated H is >>>>>> only one cycle away from its return when its simulation is aborted. >>>>> HHH is required to report on what would happen if HHH did not abort. >>>>> HHH is forbidden from getting its own self stuck in infinite >>>>> execution. Emulated instances of itself is not its actual self. >>>> No. HHH is simulating itself, not a different function that does not >>>> abort. All calls are instances of the same code with the same >>>> parameters. They all do the same thing: aborting. >>> HHH always meets its abort criteria first because it always sees at >>> least one fully execution trace of DDD before the next inner one. It >>> is stupidly incorrect to think that HHH can wait on the next one. >> Stupidly incorrect is thinking that the next one wouldn’t abort just >> because that part isn’t simulated. > Unless the outermost one aborts none of them do. Since the outermost aborts, all of them do. -- Am Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:52:17 -0500 schrieb olcott: Objectively I am a genius.