Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<vfkb0n$3gbj$1@dont-email.me>

View for Bookmarking (what is this?)
Look up another Usenet article

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 22:11:19 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 103
Message-ID: <vfkb0n$3gbj$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vf3eu5$fbb3$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>
 <vfisco$3ner2$7@dont-email.me> <vfj28m$3j3qf$7@i2pn2.org>
 <vfj2s1$3p235$2@dont-email.me>
 <5760254052c197fc75901f09883ead163fb74936@i2pn2.org>
 <vfj58h$3p235$5@dont-email.me>
 <5fc92f15d57fb6d8c38a5b739688939158771781@i2pn2.org>
 <vfk51p$3ukdm$2@dont-email.me>
 <a0aa05cc5952a9b7908ff4881c693d9ca06bb0c5@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 04:11:20 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="aecb0ee9851572be14adcf8faad49f58";
	logging-data="115059"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/vG6T9RWGwY894f3/rR5+d"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:JdAsbuCfv8z0ZbCnJHcxQCCGIxs=
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 241026-4, 10/26/2024), Outbound message
In-Reply-To: <a0aa05cc5952a9b7908ff4881c693d9ca06bb0c5@i2pn2.org>
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
Content-Language: en-US
Bytes: 6327

On 10/26/2024 10:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 10/26/24 9:29 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 10/26/2024 8:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 10/26/24 12:26 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 10/26/2024 10:55 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 10/26/24 11:46 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 10/26/2024 10:35 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 10/26/24 9:55 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> 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?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The problem is that your HHH doesn't do that, 
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Of course it doesn't do that. It is ridiculously stupid for
>>>>>> an emulating termination analyzer to emulate a non-terminating
>>>>>> input forever.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Right, but it needs to answer about what the unaborted emulation 
>>>>> would do,
>>>>
>>>> Exactly !!!
>>>>
>>>
>>> And the unaborted emulation HALTS, since DDD calls the HHH that does 
>>> abort and return,
>>>
>>> You keep on trying to lie by playing a shell game and changing the 
>>> imput to the system, which includes the code of the HHH that DDD calls.
>>>
>>> Sorry, you are just proving your utter stupdity.
>>
>> No you are merely contradicting yourself, thus an objective
>> measure of your error opposed to a subjective opinion of me.
> 
> WHERE did I contradict myself?
> 
> The CORRECT answer is based on the actual beahvior of the direct 
> exectution of the program. That is the definition.
> 
> It is a provable fact, that the COMPLETE (and correct) emulation of the 
> input will give the same answer as that, so is an proper equivalent for 
> that definition.
> 

To the best of my knowledge you recently admitted that DDD
emulated by HHH never reaches its return instruction whether
HHH aborts its emulation or not.

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