Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++
Subject: Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this?
Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 12:23:55 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 173
Message-ID: <v2g0vb$3j0c$2@dont-email.me>
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>
 <eaa0ef93ca03f744edc4fbcf6e79fc730805cce9.camel@gmail.com>
 <v2fom7$1pfh$1@dont-email.me>
 <32565d46f03edef2380267eeb552fcce102e6753.camel@gmail.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 20 May 2024 19:23:56 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="629f9cefad5d4023792ce8f8ed8d9594";
	logging-data="117772"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/5BKN7wTYpJhAaeGKsYMSO"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:v5z7NWkeGB3quB3sA9WTQ208nXw=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <32565d46f03edef2380267eeb552fcce102e6753.camel@gmail.com>
Bytes: 7111

On 5/20/2024 11:21 AM, wij wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-05-20 at 10:02 -0500, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/20/2024 7:37 AM, wij wrote:
>>> On Sun, 2024-05-19 at 21:43 -0500, olcott wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>>>
>>>
>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>> int H(ptr x, ptr y);
>>> int D(ptr x)
>>> {
>>>     int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>     if (Halt_Status)
>>>       HERE: goto HERE;
>>>     return Halt_Status;
>>> }
>>>
>>> int main()
>>> {
>>>     H(D,D);
>>>     return 0;
>>> }
>>>
>>> The code above does not compile:
>>
>> *It does compile*
>> *It does compile*
>> *It does compile*
>> *It does compile*
>>
>> typedef int (*ptr)();
>> int H(ptr P, ptr I);
>>
>> int D(ptr x)
>> {
>>     int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>     if (Halt_Status)
>>       HERE: goto HERE;
>>     return Halt_Status;
>> }
>>
>> int main()
>> {
>>     H(D,D);
>>     return 0;
>> }
>>
>> cl  /GS- /std:c11 /c /arch:IA32 Test_Compile.c
>> cl  /GS- /std:c17 /c /arch:IA32 Test_Compile.c
>> if ERRORLEVEL 1 pause
>>
>>
>> D:\__HP_Stream\__NLU_Notes\__Work_In_Progress\__Halt_Decider_X86\___x86utm_VS>echo
>> off
>>
>> D:\__HP_Stream\__NLU_Notes\__Work_In_Progress\__Halt_Decider_X86\___x86utm_VS>REM
>> 2022
>>
>> D:\__HP_Stream\__NLU_Notes\__Work_In_Progress\__Halt_Decider_X86\___x86utm_VS>call
>> "C:\Program Files\Microsoft Visual
>> Studio\2022\Community\Common7\Tools\VsDevCmd.BAT"
>> **********************************************************************
>> ** Visual Studio 2022 Developer Command Prompt v17.6.4
>> ** Copyright (c) 2022 Microsoft Corporation
>> **********************************************************************
>> Microsoft (R) C/C++ Optimizing Compiler Version 19.36.32535 for x86
>> Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.
>>
>> Test_Compile.c
>> Microsoft (R) C/C++ Optimizing Compiler Version 19.36.32535 for x86
>> Copyright (C) Microsoft Corporation.  All rights reserved.
>>
>> Test_Compile.c
>> Press any key to continue . . .
> 
> OK, My fault, gcc can compile (g++ can't. No idea why D's protocol doesn't match
> type ptr and get compiled in C).
> 


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.

*I just need to people that have persistently lied*
*about this for two years to be put in their place*

*Can you see that*
For every H/D pair of the above template D correctly simulated by pure
function (thus computable function) H cannot possibly reach its own
final state at line 06 and halt.



-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========