Path: ...!feed.opticnetworks.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic
Subject: Re: Simulating termination analyzers for dummies
Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 10:08:59 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 105
Message-ID: <v4u3mr$1rrod$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v4oaqu$f9p5$1@dont-email.me> <v4os9e$i70m$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4p9mb$lavj$1@dont-email.me> <v4pdph$l7lf$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4pepj$ln46$15@dont-email.me> <v4pgk3$l7le$2@dont-email.me>
 <v4phhl$mub6$2@dont-email.me> <v4piea$l7le$5@dont-email.me>
 <v4pmb8$nmvq$1@dont-email.me> <v4rekj$180pg$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4rv45$1blnm$1@dont-email.me> <v4s8k7$1dcrb$1@dont-email.me>
 <v4s9cj$1dk9i$1@dont-email.me> <v4sa6j$1dcrb$3@dont-email.me>
 <v4scfo$1eb2f$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2024 10:09:00 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f73c32778335b0321bd1b04b79c4c70c";
	logging-data="1961741"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+eNOrc7m8NU/pQPy6FNuMf"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:jBf6RevoRlBJjSGLYfYFfk3h5TA=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <v4scfo$1eb2f$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 5995

Op 18.jun.2024 om 18:26 schreef olcott:
> On 6/18/2024 10:47 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 18.jun.2024 om 17:33 schreef olcott:
>>> On 6/18/2024 10:20 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>
>>> It is a verified fact that serious C people have recently
>>> agreed to the following verbatim statement in the C group.
> 
> http://al.howardknight.net/?STYPE=msgid&MSGI=%3Cv4pg5p%24morv%241%40raubtier-asyl.eternal-september.org%3E+
> 
>>> You either lack this degree of skill in C or are only
>>> interested in playing head games.
>>
>> I have seen the response. It was most certainly not a serious reply.
>> But you know apparently to little of C to understand that.
>> Probably, because you are unable to escape from rebuttal mode, even if 
>> the truth is obvious.
>>
> 
> I have known C since K&R was the standard and met
> Bjarne Stroustrup when he came to our university
> to promote his new C++ programming language.
> 
> *You seem to be willfully ignorant*
> 
>> It was your own proof that showed that in
>>
>>         int main()
>>         {
>>           return H(main);
>>         }
>>
>>
>> main halts, whereas H reported non-halting. So, it you were honest you 
>> would stop claiming that H is correct.
>>
> 
> That is merely a more difficult to understand version of this
> same pathological relationship.
> 
> int main()
> {
>    Output("Input_Halts = ", HH0(main));
> }
> 
> _main()
> [000020c2] 55         push ebp
> [000020c3] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [000020c5] 68c2200000 push 000020c2 ; push main
> [000020ca] e833f4ffff call 00001502 ; call HH0
> [000020cf] 83c404     add esp,+04
> [000020d2] 50         push eax
> [000020d3] 6843070000 push 00000743
> [000020d8] e885e6ffff call 00000762
> [000020dd] 83c408     add esp,+08
> [000020e0] eb04       jmp 000020e6
> [000020e2] 33c0       xor eax,eax
> [000020e4] eb02       jmp 000020e8
> [000020e6] 33c0       xor eax,eax
> [000020e8] 5d         pop ebp
> [000020e9] c3         ret
> Size in bytes:(0040) [000020e9]
> 
>   machine   stack     stack     machine    assembly
>   address   address   data      code       language
>   ========  ========  ========  =========  =============
> [000020c2][001036c3][00000000] 55         push ebp
> [000020c3][001036c3][00000000] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [000020c5][001036bf][000020c2] 68c2200000 push 000020c2 ; push main
> [000020ca][001036bb][000020cf] e833f4ffff call 00001502 ; call HH0
> New slave_stack at:103767
> 
> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:11376f
> [000020c2][0011375f][00113763] 55         push ebp      ; begin main
> [000020c3][0011375f][00113763] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [000020c5][0011375b][000020c2] 68c2200000 push 000020c2 ; push main
> [000020ca][00113757][000020cf] e833f4ffff call 00001502 ; call HH0
> New slave_stack at:14e18f
> [000020c2][0015e187][0015e18b] 55         push ebp      ; begin main
> [000020c3][0015e187][0015e18b] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [000020c5][0015e183][000020c2] 68c2200000 push 000020c2 ; push main
> [000020ca][0015e17f][000020cf] e833f4ffff call 00001502 ; call HH0
> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped
> 
> [000020cf][001036c3][00000000] 83c404     add esp,+04
> [000020d2][001036bf][00000000] 50         push eax
> [000020d3][001036bb][00000743] 6843070000 push 00000743
> [000020d8][001036bb][00000743] e885e6ffff call 00000762
> Input_Halts = 0
> [000020dd][001036c3][00000000] 83c408     add esp,+08
> [000020e0][001036c3][00000000] eb04       jmp 000020e6
> [000020e6][001036c3][00000000] 33c0       xor eax,eax
> [000020e8][001036c7][00000018] 5d         pop ebp
> [000020e9][001036cb][00000000] c3         ret           ; exit main
> Number of Instructions Executed(10070) == 150 Pages
> 

It is easier to understand because a print statement was added.
You proved that it halts, but H0 reports non-halting.
So, it produces a false negative.
So, now it has been proved that H, H0, etc produce false negatives, when 
used to determine halting behaviour, please, stop to call them 
halt-deciders, or termination-deciders.
They might be "simulation deciders". When returning true, the simulation 
was correct, when false, the full simulation was not possible.