| Deutsch English Français Italiano |
|
<e2a083120d41675bc620acb5904409f5f95c32b3@i2pn2.org> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: joes <noreply@example.org> Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Kicking the straw-man deception out on its ass Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2025 08:27:40 -0000 (UTC) Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: <e2a083120d41675bc620acb5904409f5f95c32b3@i2pn2.org> References: <vq2i40$ug75$3@dont-email.me> <vq2l9p$tth2$2@dont-email.me> <vq2m2p$vkkb$1@dont-email.me> <7b0a90e744f28e7dfe86481ba3eb5b438b6d2af4@i2pn2.org> <vq3073$vkkb$4@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 3 Mar 2025 08:27:40 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="2616569"; 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 Am Sun, 02 Mar 2025 19:21:39 -0600 schrieb olcott: > On 3/2/2025 6:42 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 3/2/25 5:28 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 3/2/2025 4:15 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>> Op 02.mrt.2025 om 22:21 schreef olcott: >>>> In other words 'non terminating behavior' means that *HHH* was unable >>>> to reach the 'ret' instruction. >>> >>> Not at all. The fact that DD calls its own emulator makes DD unable to >>> reach its own "ret" instruction. >>> >> No, it calls a specific emulator, that of a given HHH. There is no >> requirement for the program DD to be emulated by that program. >> > THE FACT THAT DD DOES CALL ITS OWN EMULATOR > MAKES DD UNABLE TO REACH ITS OWN "ret" INSTRUCTION DD reaches its return instruction. But HHH can't simulate itself. > That I did not think of those words two years ago seems to make me a > moron about effective communication. Yay for introspection! -- Am Sat, 20 Jul 2024 12:35:31 +0000 schrieb WM in sci.math: It is not guaranteed that n+1 exists for every n.