Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies
 non-terminating behavior to HHH
Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2025 16:51:36 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 72
Message-ID: <votq5o$ppgs$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vo6420$3mpmf$1@dont-email.me> <vo7be3$jug$1@dont-email.me>
 <vo7r8d$36ra$3@dont-email.me> <vo9ura$i5ha$1@dont-email.me>
 <voahc5$m3dj$8@dont-email.me> <vocdo9$14kc0$1@dont-email.me>
 <vocpl7$16c4e$4@dont-email.me> <vof56u$1n9k0$1@dont-email.me>
 <vofnj2$1qh2r$2@dont-email.me> <vohrmi$29f46$1@dont-email.me>
 <vojs0e$2oikq$4@dont-email.me> <vokdha$2rcqi$1@dont-email.me>
 <vom1fr$34osr$1@dont-email.me> <von0iq$3d619$1@dont-email.me>
 <vondj5$3ffar$1@dont-email.me> <vopke4$3v10c$1@dont-email.me>
 <vosn00$jd5m$1@dont-email.me>
 <f9a0a18d52ac35171173e0c60c9062e03343ad68@i2pn2.org>
 <vote0u$nf28$1@dont-email.me>
 <3b8a5f4be53047b2a6c03f9678d0253e137d3c40@i2pn2.org>
 <votn1l$pb7c$1@dont-email.me>
 <5cd9bc55c484f10efd7818ecadf169a11fcc58e1@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2025 23:51:37 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="c928bd9eb52e5cb5acf316a3ad4e5e6d";
	logging-data="845340"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/awQvgmlyrCJodm3rnXOxg"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:+ogeH26bzCE7n/lxTAosH/wn7jc=
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250216-4, 2/16/2025), Outbound message
In-Reply-To: <5cd9bc55c484f10efd7818ecadf169a11fcc58e1@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 4781

On 2/16/2025 4:30 PM, joes wrote:
> Am Sun, 16 Feb 2025 15:58:14 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>> On 2/16/2025 2:02 PM, joes wrote:
>>> Am Sun, 16 Feb 2025 13:24:14 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 2/16/2025 10:35 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>> Am Sun, 16 Feb 2025 06:51:12 -0600 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>> On 2/15/2025 2:49 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>> On 2025-02-14 12:40:04 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>> On 2/14/2025 2:58 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-14 00:07:23 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>> On 2/13/2025 3:20 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-13 04:21:34 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2/12/2025 4:04 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2025-02-11 14:41:38 +0000, olcott said:
> 
>>>>>>>> DD  correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> That claim has already shown to be false. Nothing above shows that
>>>>>>> HHH does not return 0. If it does DD also returns 0.
>>>>>> When we are referring to the above DD simulated by HHH and not
>>>>>> trying to get away with changing the subject to some other DD
>>>>>> somewhere else
>>>>> such as one that calls a non-aborting version of HHH
>>>>>
>>>>>> then anyone with sufficient knowledge of C programming knows that no
>>>>>> instance of DD shown above simulated by any corresponding instance
>>>>>> of HHH can possibly terminate normally.
>>>>> Well, then that corresponding (by what?) HHH isn’t a decider.
>>>> I am focusing on the isomorphic notion of a termination analyzer.
>>> (There are other deciders that are not termination analysers.)
>>>
>>>> A simulating termination analyzer correctly rejects any input that
>>>> must be aborted to prevent its own non-termination.
>>> Yes, in particular itself is not such an input, because we *know* that
>>> it halts, because it is a decider. You can’t have your cake and eat it
>>> too.
>> I am not even using the confusing term "halts".
>> Instead I am using in its place "terminates normally".
>> DD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally.
> What’s confusing about „halts”? I find it clearer as it does not imply
> an ambiguous „abnormal termination”. How does HHH simulate DD
> terminating abnormally, then? Why doesn’t it terminate abnormally
> itself?
> You can substitute the term: the input DD to HHH does not need to be
> aborted, because the simulated decider terminates.
> 

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);
}

Every simulated input that must be aborted to
prevent the non-termination of HHH is stipulated
to be correctly rejected by HHH as non-terminating.




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