Deutsch   English   Français   Italiano  
<vgfv31$25h28$1@dont-email.me>

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

Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder2.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: The philosophy of computation reformulates existing ideas on a new basis
Date: Wed, 6 Nov 2024 16:39:29 +0200
Organization: -
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <vgfv31$25h28$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vfli1h$fj8s$1@dont-email.me> <vflue8$3nvp8$2@i2pn2.org> <vfmd8m$k2m7$1@dont-email.me> <bcd82d9f8a987d3884220c0df7b8f7204cb9de3e@i2pn2.org> <vfmueh$mqn9$1@dont-email.me> <ff039b922cabbb6d44f90aa71a52d8c2f446b6ab@i2pn2.org> <vfo95k$11qs1$1@dont-email.me> <vfp8c0$3tobi$2@i2pn2.org> <vfpcko$1837o$3@dont-email.me> <vfpish$3u885$2@i2pn2.org> <vfpjk2$1976k$1@dont-email.me> <086fc32f14bcc004466d3128b0fe585b27377399@i2pn2.org> <vfqsui$1jg6i$2@dont-email.me> <vft4om$44tc$2@i2pn2.org> <vft944$25aio$6@dont-email.me> <11408789ed30027f4bc9a743f353dfa9b4712109@i2pn2.org> <QU2dnTAfup30Rr_6nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk> <vfvnml$2ll12$1@dont-email.me> <vfvujg$2mcse$6@dont-email.me> <vg2cqm$37cq6$1@dont-email.me> <vg2kfq$38m0h$1@dont-email.me> <vg4va2$3ok87$1@dont-email.me> <vg55lv$3pnvp$1@dont-email.me> <vg7sdl$cbfk$1@dont-email.me> <vg83vt$dri5$1@dont-email.me> <vgcmu4$1eurt$1@dont-email.me> <vgd5vl$1hqli$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 06 Nov 2024 15:39:30 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2f08683d228596561c9eb1a8bc09afc7";
	logging-data="2278472"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19r4fTnYWg8L0KmtElSRQnQ"
User-Agent: Unison/2.2
Cancel-Lock: sha1:v+cz/IPHEeme5J2lDHHiQqTESgQ=
Bytes: 3529

On 2024-11-05 13:18:43 +0000, olcott said:

> On 11/5/2024 3:01 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-11-03 15:13:56 +0000, olcott said:
>> 
>>> On 11/3/2024 7:04 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-11-02 12:24:29 +0000, olcott said:
>>>> 
>>>>> HHH does compute the mapping from its input DDD
>>>>> to the actual behavior that DDD specifies and this
>>>>> DOES INCLUDE HHH emulating itself emulating DDD.
>>>> 
>>>> Yes but not the particular mapping required by the halting problem.
>>> 
>>> Yes it is the particular mapping required by the halting problem.
>>> The exact same process occurs in the Linz proof.
>> 
>> The halting probelm requires that every halt decider terminates.
>> If HHH(DDD) terminates so does DDD. The halting problmen requires
>> that if DDD terminates then HHH(DDD) accepts as halting.
> 
> void Infinite_Loop()
> {
>    HERE: goto HERE;
>    return;
> }
> 
> No that is false.
> The measure is whether a C function can possibly
> reach its "return" instruction final state.

Not in the original problem but the question whether a particular strictly
C function will ever reach its return instruction is equally hard. About
a C function that is not strictly conforming the question may have a
third answer that it may or may not reach its "return" instruction dpending
on the C implementation.

A C function can terminate without reaching its return statement.
The C standard specifies several other possibilities.

> Your measure determines that Infinite_Loop() halts.

No, it does not. You should not present claims without justification.
To look like liar is not the best defence against being called a liar.

-- 
Mikko