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