Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: The actual code of HHH
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 20:00:05 -0500
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <893166df3c65a4cc0873df004973933fd2b670f4@i2pn2.org>
References: <f73c3b97590a4d189e33a2cf255ed3337e56d3cf@i2pn2.org>
 <vpo6v9$2p51t$1@dont-email.me> <vppb4e$323f6$1@dont-email.me>
 <vpq0cr$35jvb$3@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 01:00:06 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="2112681"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg";
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
In-Reply-To: <vpq0cr$35jvb$3@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 3274
Lines: 50

On 2/27/25 10:29 AM, olcott wrote:
> On 2/27/2025 3:26 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 27.feb.2025 om 00:09 schreef olcott:
>>> On 2/26/2025 3:52 PM, joes wrote:
>>>> Since there is so much talk around, but not really about it,
>>>> let's take a look:
>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/
>>>> 48b4cbfeb3f486507276a5fc4e9b10875ab24dbf/Halt7.c#L1081
>>>> In line 1137, we compute a flag:
>>>> u32 Root = Init_Halts_HH(&Aborted, &execution_trace, &decoded, 
>>>> &code_end,
>>>> (u32)P, &master_state, &slave_state, &slave_stack);
>>>> In line 918, we find it basically checks for the magic number
>>>> **execution_trace==0x90909090. What is this unexplained value?
>>>>
>>>> We then pass the saved flag in line 1143:
>>>> if (Decide_Halting_HH(&Aborted, &execution_trace, &decoded,
>>>> code_end, End_Of_Code, &master_state, &slave_state, &slave_stack, 
>>>> Root)),
>>>> defined in line 1030.
>>>> Then we get a switch:
>>>> 1059    if (Root)  // Master UTM halt decider
>>>> Line 1070 is then conditionally skipped:
>>>> Needs_To_Be_Aborted_HH((Decoded_Line_Of_Code*)**execution_trace);
>>>> defined in line 1012, which (on a jmp or call instruction) calls
>>>> u32 Needs_To_Be_Aborted_Trace_HH(Decoded_Line_Of_Code* execution_trace,
>>>>                                   Decoded_Line_Of_Code *current)
>>>> in line 964, where the abort logic lives. (It basically triggers
>>>> on a call or jump to itself.)
>>>>
>>>> So we only abort depending on the address of the execution trace.
>>>> This makes no sense. Why is that?
>>>>
>>>
>>> DD emulated by HHH according to the behavior that the x86
>>> machine code of DD cannot possibly terminate normally thus
>>> HHH is infallibly correct to report that this DD emulated
>>> by HHH (not any other DD in the whole freaking universe)
>>> is not-terminating.
>> No, it is correct to report that HHH is unable to correctly simulate 
>> this halting program up to its end.
> 
> In other words you are totally clueless that infinite
> recursion HAS NO END.
> 
> 

BUt there is not infinte recursion because every HHH that would be in 
that loop aborts and returns.

It has to, since that is what you code does.