Path: ...!news.misty.com!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!i2pn.org!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: joes <noreply@example.org>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the
 semantics of the x86 language
Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 16:01:20 -0000 (UTC)
Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID: <v5ujsf$1na1q$4@i2pn2.org>
References: <v5pbjf$55h$1@dont-email.me> <v5r5q9$ekvf$1@dont-email.me>
	<v5s40h$jvgt$1@dont-email.me> <v5tgvj$utcb$1@dont-email.me>
	<v5u8c9$12udb$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 16:01:20 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: i2pn2.org;
	logging-data="1812538"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org";
	posting-account="nS1KMHaUuWOnF/ukOJzx6Ssd8y16q9UPs1GZ+I3D0CM";
User-Agent: Pan/0.145 (Duplicitous mercenary valetism; d7e168a
 git.gnome.org/pan2)
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0
Bytes: 2115
Lines: 24

Am Mon, 01 Jul 2024 07:44:57 -0500 schrieb olcott:
> On 7/1/2024 1:05 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-06-30 17:18:09 +0000, olcott said:
>>>
>>> Richard just said that he affirms that when DDD correctly simulated by
>>> HHH calls HHH(DDD) that this call returns even though the semantics of
>>> the x86 language disagrees.
The x86 semantics say that an aborted simulation returns.

>> It is your HHH so you should know whether it returns. Others may have
>> wrong impression about it if they have trusted your lies.
> I have never lied about this.
You are inconsistent about whether HHH returns or not.

> DDD is emulated by HHH which calls an emulated HHH(DDD) to
> repeat the process until aborted. Once aborted the DDD emulated by HHH
> immediately stops.
DDD running by itself does not stop. HHH stops simulating it.
> At no point in this emulation does the call from DDD emulated
> by HHH to HHH(DDD) ever return.
Where does the outer call to HHH get stuck after aborting?

-- 
Am Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:52:17 -0500 schrieb olcott:
Objectively I am a genius.