Path: ...!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 17:47:04 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 229
Message-ID: <v4uuho$1vtc8$5@dont-email.me>
References: <v4oaqu$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> <v4u3mr$1rrod$2@dont-email.me>
 <v4ukq9$1vpm0$2@dont-email.me> <v4uo37$1vtc8$2@dont-email.me>
 <v4urs3$21810$2@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 17:47:05 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f73c32778335b0321bd1b04b79c4c70c";
	logging-data="2094472"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+Aw6ru8Uzyb/+qlna69pvy"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:tyC3XiiABsDxu5TxlYhqlUoUDWw=
Content-Language: en-GB
In-Reply-To: <v4urs3$21810$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 11493

Op 19.jun.2024 om 17:01 schreef olcott:
> On 6/19/2024 8:56 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 19.jun.2024 om 15:00 schreef olcott:
>>> On 6/19/2024 3:08 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>>> 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.
>>>
>>> I don't want to discuss your screwy example because I
>>> can't use screwy examples in my paper.
>>>
>>> void DDD()
>>> {
>>>    H0(DDD);
>>> }
>>>
>>> _DDD()
>>> [000020a2] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
>>> [000020a3] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
>>> [000020a5] 68a2200000 push 000020a2 ; push DDD
>>> [000020aa] e8f3f9ffff call 00001aa2 ; call H0
>>> [000020af] 83c404     add esp,+04   ; housekeeping
>>> [000020b2] 5d         pop ebp       ; housekeeping
>>> [000020b3] c3         ret           ; never gets here
>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [000020b3]
>>>
>>> Exactly which step of DDD emulated by H0 was emulated
>>> incorrectly such that this emulation would be complete?
>>> AKA DDD emulated by H0 reaches machine address [000020b3]
>>>
>>
>> Yes, that is your attitude. An example that proves you are wrong are 
>> called 'screwy'. You prefer more complex examples, for which you can 
>> easier hide the essential details.
>>
> 
> void DDD()
> {
>    HH0(DDD);
> }
> 
> int main()
> {
>    HH0(DDD);
> }
> 
> _DDD()
> [00002093] 55         push ebp
> [00002094] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [00002096] 6893200000 push 00002093 ; push DDD
> [0000209b] e853f4ffff call 000014f3 ; call HH0
> [000020a0] 83c404     add esp,+04
> [000020a3] 5d         pop ebp
> [000020a4] c3         ret
> Size in bytes:(0018) [000020a4]
> 
> _main()
> [000020b3] 55         push ebp
> [000020b4] 8bec       mov ebp,esp
> [000020b6] 6893200000 push 00002093 ; push DDD
> [000020bb] e833f4ffff call 000014f3 ; call HH0
> [000020c0] 83c404     add esp,+04
> [000020c3] eb04       jmp 000020c9
> [000020c5] 33c0       xor eax,eax
> [000020c7] eb02       jmp 000020cb
> [000020c9] 33c0       xor eax,eax
> [000020cb] 5d         pop ebp
========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========