Path: ...!news.nobody.at!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: Who here understands that the last paragraph is Necessarily true?
Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 08:26:22 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 66
Message-ID: <v7381u$mjis$13@dont-email.me>
References: <v6un9t$3nufp$1@dont-email.me> <v7013v$2ccv$1@dont-email.me>
 <v70nt7$61d8$6@dont-email.me> <v72m95$kbi2$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Mon, 15 Jul 2024 15:26:23 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="13997779445f04dacae82f025877e637";
	logging-data="740956"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19lsFYN+7MjbkeY+4gj5te9"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:wYmPQjVH8DhmBTL3civnaA1DLnk=
In-Reply-To: <v72m95$kbi2$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 2892

On 7/15/2024 3:23 AM, Mikko wrote:
> On 2024-07-14 14:38:31 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>> On 7/14/2024 3:09 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>> On 2024-07-13 20:15:56 +0000, olcott said:
>>>
>>>> typedef void (*ptr)();
>>>> int HHH(ptr P);
>>>>
>>>> void Infinite_Loop()
>>>> {
>>>>    HERE: goto HERE;
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> void Infinite_Recursion()
>>>> {
>>>>    Infinite_Recursion();
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> void DDD()
>>>> {
>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> int main()
>>>> {
>>>>    HHH(Infinite_Loop);
>>>>    HHH(Infinite_Recursion);
>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>> }
>>>>
>>>> Any input that must be aborted to prevent the non
>>>> termination of HHH necessarily specifies non-halting
>>>> behavior or it would never need to be aborted.
>>>
>>> Everyone understands that DDD specifies a halting behaviour if 
>>> HHH(DDD) does,
>>
>>
>> *You can comprehend this is a truism or fail to*
>> *comprehend it disagreement is necessarily incorrect*
>> Any input that must be aborted to prevent the non
>> termination of HHH necessarily specifies non-halting
>> behavior or it would never need to be aborted.
>>
>> Disagreeing with the above is analogous to disagreeing
>> with arithmetic.
> 
> That the input is aborted does not mean that the input must be aborted.

Weasel words. This is an axiom:
Input XXX must be aborted to prevent the non-termination of HHH.

 From the fact that XXX must be aborted we can conclude that XXX must be 
aborted.

I can't see how you were simply not flat out dishonest.

> And if the input specifies that its input is aborted then the behaviour
> is not non-terminating.
> 

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