Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.quux.org!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies
 non-terminating behavior to HHH
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 2025 10:54:57 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 56
Message-ID: <vo79lj$8vq$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vo6420$3mpmf$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 08 Feb 2025 10:55:00 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="1fdbf2580a5550da137bd470f6106b60";
	logging-data="9210"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX182/b5loV85cF4XC9R6CiHP"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:d1kByHIIrgH/c5X6fkxw+6DxuSw=
In-Reply-To: <vo6420$3mpmf$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: nl, en-GB
Bytes: 3015

Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott:
> Experts in the C programming language will know that DD
> correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own
> "if" statement.

Yes, it demonstrates the incapability of HHH to correctly determine the 
halting behaviour of DD

> 
> The finite string DD specifies non-terminating recursive
> simulation to simulating termination analyzer HHH. This
> makes HHH necessarily correct to reject its input as
> non-halting.

The finite string defines one behaviour. This finite string, when given 
to an X86 processor shows halting behaviour. This finite string,when 
given to a world class simulator, shows halting behaviour. Only HHH 
fails to see this proven halting behaviour. So it proves the failure of HHH.
HHH aborts the simulation on unsound grounds one cycle before the 
simulation would terminate normally.

> 
> typedef void (*ptr)();
> int HHH(ptr P);
> 
> int DD()
> {
>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>    if (Halt_Status)
>      HERE: goto HERE;
>    return Halt_Status;
> }
> 
> int main()
> {
>    HHH(DD);
> }
> 
> https://www.researchgate.net/ 
> publication/369971402_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D
> 
> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
> has fully operational HHH and DD
> 
> The halting problem has always been a mathematical mapping
> from finite strings to behaviors. 

Yes. And the behaviour of this finite string has been proven to show 
halting behaviour. Only Olcott's HHH fails to see it.
His misunderstanding is that he thinks that the behaviour defined by the 
finite string depends on the simulator.
He fail to see that a finite string defines a behaviour independent of 
the thing that runs or simulates it. It seems that he is incapable to 
learn that a failure of a simulator does not define a behaviour.