Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Verified facts regarding the software engineering of DDD, HHH,
 and HHH1 --- TYPO
Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2024 08:55:36 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 76
Message-ID: <vfisco$3ner2$7@dont-email.me>
References: <vf3eu5$fbb3$2@dont-email.me> <vf8ads$1gkf5$1@dont-email.me>
 <13583474d25855e665daa98d91605e958f5cf472@i2pn2.org>
 <vf8i1g$1h5mj$4@dont-email.me>
 <45ea7a6da46453c9da62c1149fa1cf7739218c5f@i2pn2.org>
 <vf9qai$1scol$1@dont-email.me>
 <2a210ab064b3a8c3397600b4fe87aa390868bb12@i2pn2.org>
 <vf9sk6$1sfva$2@dont-email.me>
 <4c67570b4898e14665bde2dfdf473130b89b7dd4@i2pn2.org>
 <vfaqe7$21k64$1@dont-email.me>
 <f789d3ef27e3000f04feb3df4fc561c5da02381f@i2pn2.org>
 <vfcbl5$2b6h0$2@dont-email.me>
 <b707850664ad22bb1172006f4e24a27633ff1a4d@i2pn2.org>
 <vfe344$2o992$1@dont-email.me>
 <94449dae60f42358ae29bb710ca9bc3b18c60ad7@i2pn2.org>
 <vfeqqo$2ruhp$1@dont-email.me>
 <0553e6ab73fa9a21f062de4d645549ae48fd0a64@i2pn2.org>
 <vfg6us$36im7$2@dont-email.me>
 <da2d4f48cb3b9ac2e44b6f9c9ab28adb3022acb1@i2pn2.org>
 <vfh428$3bkkv$2@dont-email.me>
 <c72aa667027121011042e8b4413d343f3c61bdd1@i2pn2.org>
 <vfh97v$3cdsr$3@dont-email.me>
 <92284cbd62a02a73c2bb943d965ccdacce3726fc@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2024 15:55:37 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="f00999e9e0e5447cf99e873d021c7ec9";
	logging-data="3914594"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18O3Eqvwk8803rSut0FXHbo"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:LHRJ67Ev/pbLaawSav9yKwuzUBA=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <92284cbd62a02a73c2bb943d965ccdacce3726fc@i2pn2.org>
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241026-2, 10/26/2024), Outbound message
Bytes: 4867

On 10/25/2024 11:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 10/25/24 7:22 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/25/2024 5:17 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>>>
>>> No, I said a PARTIAL emulation is an incorrect basis.
>>>
>>> You are just a proven liar that twists peoples words because you 
>>> don't know what you are talking about.
>>>
>>
>> It is ridiculously stupid to require a complete emulation
>> of a non-terminating input. No twisted words there.
> 
> HHH doesn't need to to the complete emulation, just show that the 
> complete emulation doesn't reach an end.
> 

Then you admit that DDD emulated by HHH according to the
semantics of the x86 language cannot possibly reach its
own "return" instruction?

> IF you want to call that rediculously stupid, you are just showing your 
> own stupidity, as that IS the requirement, and you can't show anything 
> that proves it otherwise, because you just don't know anything about the 
> fundamental facts of what you talk about.
> 

I am not the one stupidly requiring the compete emulation
of a non-terminating input.

>>
>>> The problem is that any HHH that answers for the input built on it, 
>>> must have been a decider that aborts when emulating that input, and 
>>> thus only does a partial emulation.
>>>
>>
>> It is ridiculously stupid to require a complete emulation
>> of a non-terminating input. No twisted words there.
> 
> HHH doesn't need to to the complete emulation, just show that the 
> complete emulation doesn't reach an end.
> 
> IF you want to call that rediculously stupid, you are just showing your 
> own stupidity, as that IS the requirement, and you can't show anything 
> that proves it otherwise, because you just don't know anything about the 
> fundamental facts of what you talk about.
> 

Then you admit that DDD emulated by HHH according to the
semantics of the x86 language cannot possibly reach its
own "return" instruction?

> 
>>
>>> That is why HHH1 can get the right answer, because, not actually 
>>> being an exact copy, it is able to emulate the input to the end, and 
>>> see that it will halt.
>>>
>>
>> It is an exact copy AND THE ONLY RELEVANT DIFFERENCE
>> IS THAT DDD CALLS HHH AND DOES NOT CALL HHH1. This
>> was even over Mike's head.
>>
>>
> 
> Nope, It just proves that your HHH is not a "pure function" of its 
> input, as it uses a "hidden input" and thus just fails to even be of the 
> right form to be a decider.
> 

We have not got to the point in the conversation where
we begin to talk about pure functions because you insist
on dodging a mandatory prerequisite point.

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