Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<vamk7l$3d7ki$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: DDD emulated by HHH --- (does not refer to prior posts) Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 10:39:33 +0300 Organization: - Lines: 45 Message-ID: <vamk7l$3d7ki$1@dont-email.me> References: <vajdta$2qe9s$1@dont-email.me> <vak3a0$2teq9$1@dont-email.me> <vakhnf$302rl$2@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:39:34 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="bc8c8ad877fece46b9cf9f72007a8e93"; logging-data="3579538"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19rXSVDjSolyRTLzSPQ52Gv" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:Dt0j8jJeCCSUpAjCS8ZoU5RRYqw= Bytes: 2424 On 2024-08-27 12:44:31 +0000, olcott said: > On 8/27/2024 3:38 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >> Op 27.aug.2024 om 04:33 schreef olcott: >>> This is intended to be a stand-alone post that does not >>> reference anything else mentioned in any other posts. >>> >>> void DDD() >>> { >>> HHH(DDD); >>> return; >>> } >>> >>> _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] >>> >>> When we assume that: >>> (a) HHH is an x86 emulator that is in the same memory space as DDD. >>> (b) HHH emulates DDD according to the semantics of the x86 language. >>> >>> then we can see that DDD emulated by HHH cannot possibly get past >>> its own machine address 0000217a. >>> >> >> >> Yes, we see. In fact DDD is not needed at all. > > A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal > fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under > discussion... > https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man You should also point a link to the equivocation fallacy. You use it more often than straw man. -- Mikko