Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!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: DDD correctly emulated by HHH is Correctly rejected as
 non-halting V2
Date: Sun, 14 Jul 2024 19:30:27 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 78
Message-ID: <v71qj3$bvm2$2@dont-email.me>
References: <v6rg65$32o1o$3@dont-email.me>
 <97e0632d0d889d141bdc6005ce6e513c53867798@i2pn2.org>
 <v6sdlu$382g0$1@dont-email.me> <v6td3a$3ge79$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6tp1j$3imib$2@dont-email.me> <v6trdu$3irhh$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6tu01$3imib$11@dont-email.me>
 <a177dd76613794d6bb877c65ffe6c587a8f31bc1@i2pn2.org>
 <v6tvpv$3imib$14@dont-email.me>
 <091e8b7baeea467ee894b1c79c8943cb9773adb7@i2pn2.org>
 <v6u346$3khl8$1@dont-email.me>
 <16ac79611a441e7e01119631051f69119eee958a@i2pn2.org>
 <v6v06i$3pivt$1@dont-email.me>
 <23cb2d2401b87bf4f6a604aa1a78b93ffc9a29bc@i2pn2.org>
 <v6v2t1$3pmjn$3@dont-email.me>
 <3fc6548531f91ed14a27420caf9679a634573ed0@i2pn2.org>
 <v70lmo$61d8$1@dont-email.me>
 <8a6e6d9ff49aabe2525ce5729a439c807de4768a@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 02:30:28 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="13997779445f04dacae82f025877e637";
	logging-data="392898"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+rO1R2bK/0O31+R+tJmgLb"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:oVjK4O5MGFnC8SoiFmWZDNEvPx0=
In-Reply-To: <8a6e6d9ff49aabe2525ce5729a439c807de4768a@i2pn2.org>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 5248

On 7/14/2024 7:20 PM, joes wrote:
> Am Sun, 14 Jul 2024 09:00:55 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>> On 7/14/2024 3:29 AM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Sat, 13 Jul 2024 18:33:53 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 7/13/2024 6:26 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>> Can you elaborate? All runtime instances share the same static code.
>>>>> I am talking about the inner HHH which is called by the simulated
>>>>> DDD. That one is, according to you, aborted. Which is wrong, because
>>>>> by virtue of running the same code, the inner HHH aborts ITS
>>>>> simulation of DDD calling another HHH.
> 
>>> What are the twins and what is their difference?
>>> Do you disagree with my tracing?
> 
> 
>> The directly executed DDD is like the first call of infinite recursion.
>> The emulated DDD is just like the second call of infinite recursion.
>> When the second call of infinite recursion is aborted then the first
>> call halts.
> Not really. Execution does not continue.
>> void Infinite_Recursion()
>> {
>>     Infinite_Recursion();
>> }
>> The above *is* infinite recursion.
>> A program could emulate the above code and simply skip line 3 causing
>> Infinite_Recursion() to halt.
> That would be incorrect.
> 
>> When DDD calls HHH(DDD) HHH returns.
> Therefore it does not need to be aborted.
>> When DDD correctly emulated by HHH the call never returns as is proven
>> below. The executed DDD() has HHH(DDD) skip this call.
> I do not see this below.
>> HHH(DDD) must skip this call itself by terminating the whole DDD
>> process.
> 
>> Because this HHH does not know its own machine address HHH only sees
>> that DDD calls a function that causes its first four steps to be
>> repeated. HHH does not know that this is recursive simulation. To HHH it
>> looks just like infinite recursion.
> 
>> New slave_stack at:1038c4 -- create new process context for 1st DDD
>> Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:1138cc
> 
>> [0000217a][001138b4][0000217f] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
>> New slave_stack at:14e2ec -- create new process context for 2nd DDD
> 
>> [0000217a][0015e2dc][0000217f] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
>> Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped

> How is this detected? Is it also triggered when calling a function
> in a loop?
> 

You never bothered to answer whether or not you have 100%
understanding of infinite recursion. If you don't then you
can never understand what I am saying. If you do that I
already proved my point. Here is the proof again:

New slave_stack at:1038c4
Begin Local Halt Decider Simulation   Execution Trace Stored at:1138cc
[00002172][001138bc][001138c0] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173][001138bc][001138c0] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175][001138b8][00002172] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a][001138b4][0000217f] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
New slave_stack at:14e2ec
[00002172][0015e2e4][0015e2e8] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173][0015e2e4][0015e2e8] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175][0015e2e0][00002172] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a][0015e2dc][0000217f] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
Local Halt Decider: Infinite Recursion Detected Simulation Stopped


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