Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<v6mlfj$bbr$2@news.muc.de> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!feeds.phibee-telecom.net!2.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!news2.arglkargh.de!news.karotte.org!news.space.net!news.muc.de!.POSTED.news.muc.de!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is correctly rejected as non-halting. Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:55:47 -0000 (UTC) Organization: muc.de e.V. Message-ID: <v6mlfj$bbr$2@news.muc.de> References: <v6m7si$1uq86$2@dont-email.me> <v6mhc7$20hbo$2@dont-email.me> <v6mito$bbr$1@news.muc.de> <v6mjlg$20sio$2@dont-email.me> Injection-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 18:55:47 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: news.muc.de; posting-host="news.muc.de:2001:608:1000::2"; logging-data="11643"; mail-complaints-to="news-admin@muc.de" User-Agent: tin/2.6.3-20231224 ("Banff") (FreeBSD/14.0-RELEASE-p5 (amd64)) Bytes: 1706 Lines: 26 Fred. Zwarts <F.Zwarts@hetnet.nl> wrote: > Op 10.jul.2024 om 20:12 schreef Alan Mackenzie: >> [ Followup-To: set ] >> In comp.theory Fred. Zwarts <F.Zwarts@hetnet.nl> wrote: >> [ .... ] >>> Proving that the simulation is incorrect. Because a correct simulation >>> would not abort a halting program halfway its simulation. >> Just for clarity, a correct simulation wouldn't abort a non-halting >> program either, would it? Or have I misunderstood this correctness? >> [ .... ] > A non-halting program cannot be simulated correctly in a finite time. > So, it depends whether we can call it a correct simulation, when it does > not abort. But, for some meaning of 'correct', indeed, a simulator > should not abort a non-halting program either. OK, thanks! -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).