Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: 195 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HH0
Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 08:17:27 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 61
Message-ID: <v59797$brmn$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v4vrfg$2793f$1@dont-email.me> <v58m12$8mmo$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 23 Jun 2024 15:17:27 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f19a017657c3e3f4d15756f16e311b4d";
	logging-data="388823"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18+Bnbub47k0R0zohkcIdMb"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:s+ayXNMVlEtydj4iXjPmom97NIM=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <v58m12$8mmo$1@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3445

On 6/23/2024 3:22 AM, Mikko wrote:
> The subject line is not quite correct. The execution trace is not
> 195 pages long, only 159 pages. In the beginning of the file there
> is other material, mainly several disaasembled functions, many of
> which do nothing.
> 
> Several points in the trace are incorrect.
> 
> On 2024-06-20 00:00:48 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> This shows all of the steps of HH0 simulating DDD
>> calling a simulated HH0 simulating DDD
>>
>> https://liarparadox.org/HH0_(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf
>> *Some of the key instructions are color coded*
>> GREEN---DebugStep Address
>> RED-----HH Address
>> YELLOW--All of the DDD instructions
>> CYAN----Return from DebugStep to Decide_Halting_HH
>>
>> _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]
> 
> That code is not from the mentined trace file. In that file _DDD()
> is at the addresses 2093..20a4. According to the trace no instruction
> at the address is executed (because that address points to the last byte
> of a three byte instruction.
> 

In order to make my examples I must edit the code
and this changes the addresses of some functions.

When we stipulate that the only measure of a correct emulation
is the semantics of the x86 programming language then we see
that when DDD is correctly emulated by H0 that its call to
H0(DDD) cannot possibly return.

_DDD()
[00002172] 55               push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173] 8bec             mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175] 6872210000       push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a] e853f4ffff       call 000015d2 ; call H0(DDD)
[0000217f] 83c404           add esp,+04
[00002182] 5d               pop ebp
[00002183] c3               ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]

The point is that the call from DDD to H0(DDD) cannot
possibly return to DDD correctly emulated by HHH.

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