Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c,comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this?
Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 08:41:52 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 142
Message-ID: <v2erbb$3rt3e$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
References: <v2b78t$2vima$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2df79$3ghfd$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v2di7v$3gujt$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2eada$3p6sk$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v2edbr$3pl2i$1@dont-email.me>
 <v2eluk$3r1qu$1@raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org>
 <v2enl9$3r9t0$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 08:41:48 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org; posting-host="1c7a77ed2cd6eb3214bbe78a144e9bc5";
	logging-data="4060270"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18RXyVbwwxgciARyDWlIeVVGIWdMnJqw4Q="
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:nS1Ve4ienWxFonxt78KgWt86bDw=
Content-Language: de-DE
In-Reply-To: <v2enl9$3r9t0$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 6128

Am 20.05.2024 um 07:38 schrieb olcott:
> On 5/20/2024 12:09 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 20.05.2024 um 04:43 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 5/19/2024 8:52 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>> Am 19.05.2024 um 21:00 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> On 5/19/2024 1:08 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>>>> Am 18.05.2024 um 23:40 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
>>>>>>> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>>>>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
>>>>>>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>>>>>>> 02 {
>>>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>> 07 }
>>>>>>> 08
>>>>>>> 09 int main()
>>>>>>> 10 {
>>>>>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>>>>>> 12   return 0;
>>>>>>> 13 }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly 
>>>>>>> emulates
>>>>>>> at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified 
>>>>>>> by the
>>>>>>> x86 instructions of D.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in 
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in
>>>>>>> recursive simulation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Execution Trace*
>>>>>>> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
>>>>>>> Line 01:
>>>>>>> Line 02:
>>>>>>> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Simulation invariant*
>>>>>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own 
>>>>>>> line 03.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The key thing to note is that no D correctly simulated by any H 
>>>>>>> of every
>>>>>>> H/D pair specified by the above template ever reaches its own 
>>>>>>> line 06
>>>>>>> and halts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Other people think 30s about this, you think years about that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It is the basis for my two decades long primary research into 
>>>>> termination analysis. People on another forum have written
>>>>> hundreds of posts claiming that D correctly simulated by H
>>>>> reaches its own line 06 and halts.
>>>>>
>>>>> *I have only gotten truthful answers on this forum*
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's not research, that's nonsense.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is not the forum to show that it is not nonsense this is
>>> a simple C question that I should not even have to ask except
>>> for a few people in another forum that consistently lie about
>>> the answer.
>>>
>>> I have been a professional C++ developer since Y2K. So I already
>>> know the answer, I just need some competent people in this forum
>>> to attest to this answer. I met Bjarne Stroustrup back when he
>>> was going around the country promoting his new language.
>>>
>>
>> You ask the same questions over and over again for years.
>> It's like circling your thoughts before you fall asleep -
>> you don't think about whether it really makes sense.
>>
> 
> It would take three people five minutes a piece.
> Then I can go back to the other forum.
> 
> They have been lying about how the above code works
> consistently for two years. I know how it works. I
> learned C back when K & R was the standard.
> 
> Three people take five minutes a piece to confirm the
> that the last sentence is correct.
> 
> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
> 00 int H(ptr p, ptr i);
> 01 int D(ptr p)
> 02 {
> 03   int Halt_Status = H(p, p);
> 04   if (Halt_Status)
> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
> 06   return Halt_Status;
> 07 }
> 08
> 09 int main()
> 10 {
> 11   H(D,D);
> 12   return 0;
> 13 }
> 
> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly emulates 
> at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified by the 
> x86 instructions of D.
> 
> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in the 
> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in 
> recursive simulation.
> 
> Execution Trace
> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
> 
> keeps repeating (unless aborted)
> Line 01:
> Line 02:
> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
> 
> Simulation invariant:
> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
> 
> H must be a pure function
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_function#
> 
> *THIS ONE SENTENCE NEEDS TO BE CONFIRMED*
> For every H/D pair of the above template D correctly simulated
> by H cannot possibly reach its own final state at line 06 and halt.
> 
> 

You're dealing with things no one is concerned about.