Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!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: Anyone that claims this is not telling the truth
Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 13:39:47 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 103
Message-ID: <v9qqpj$1tedb$31@dont-email.me>
References: <v9q52r$1tedb$1@dont-email.me>
 <867e1149d7291cfd965b6974aa22f104635f38aa@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qdre$1tedb$11@dont-email.me>
 <d0755e4d97f2c3caebf57ebc856ed8078be3c7dd@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qeed$1tedb$12@dont-email.me>
 <116cb41843f55511cf8fa5c2216083136e50c976@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qg05$1tedb$14@dont-email.me>
 <b8d7322ff586ee2776ced1a09090df787d889791@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qmci$1tedb$23@dont-email.me>
 <624e9a80190b25bac34b8e9ddf095ae1c4aa65d6@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qneu$1tedb$26@dont-email.me>
 <5aeaac6d89bca36e2e2564a2e60b6ed346839aab@i2pn2.org>
 <v9qp4p$1tedb$29@dont-email.me>
 <f742232fdc754b4d1998fbe57d4cbc8b6d07579d@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 20:39:48 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="5c4a0c817977c3965e873c4f304e2b88";
	logging-data="2013611"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/z5ZEC5wPC9ytEBAPtfb4D"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:/D+x8H5uKYLQsM7Bhl5Dg/Hsqh4=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <f742232fdc754b4d1998fbe57d4cbc8b6d07579d@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 5508

On 8/17/2024 1:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 8/17/24 2:11 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 8/17/2024 12:48 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 8/17/24 1:42 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 8/17/2024 12:36 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 8/17/24 1:24 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 8/17/2024 11:16 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 8/17/24 11:35 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2024 10:30 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/24 11:09 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2024 10:06 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/24 10:58 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/2024 9:10 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 8/17/24 8:29 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _DDD()
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002172] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002173] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [0000217f] 83c404     add esp,+04
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002182] 5d         pop ebp
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [00002183] c3         ret
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *It is a basic fact that DDD emulated by HHH according to*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *the semantics of the x86 language cannot possibly stop*
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> *running unless aborted* (out of memory error excluded)
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> No, anyone saying that the above is something that CAN be 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> correctly emulated by the semantics of the x86 language is 
>>>>>>>>>>>>> just a LIAR.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> You are inserting a word that I did not say.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> To say that DDD is emulated by HHH means that it must be 
>>>>>>>>>>> possible to validly do that act.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You are not going to get very far with any claim that
>>>>>>>>>> emulating a sequence of x86 machine-code bytes is impossible.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> How do you emulate dthe CALL HHH instruction without the code 
>>>>>>>>> that follows?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Who is the silly one now?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No it has moved up to a ridiculous and utterly
>>>>>>>> baseless false assumption that is directly contradicted
>>>>>>>> by the verified fact that x86utm takes Halt7.obj as
>>>>>>>> its input data, thus having all of the machine code
>>>>>>>> of HHH directly available to DDD.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And thus, ALL of memory is the "input" and thus any change in it 
>>>>>>> renders that answer possibly different.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There are no other words that can be added to my
>>>>>> words that change the immutable fact of my words.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Which are just meaningless garbage and a LIE.
>>>>>
>>>>> The DDD given can not be "emulated" by HHH, 
>>>>
>>>> *just meaningless garbage and a LIE*
>>>>
>>>
>>> So, what IS the correct emulation of a program that goes off into 
>>> undefined memory?
>>>
>>
>> Do I have to repeat this 500 times before you notice
>> that I said it once?
>>
>> Utterly baseless false assumption that is directly
>> contradicted by the verified fact that x86utm takes
>> Halt7.obj as its input data, thus having all of the
>> machine code of HHH directly available to DDD.
> 
> But x86utm isn't HHH.
> 
> 
> x86utm doesn't take "DDD" as its input, but the COFF file that contains 
> the whole problem.
> 

Thus DDD has direct access to HHH in this shared memory space.

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