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: The actual code of HHH
Date: Thu, 27 Feb 2025 17:12:10 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 64
Message-ID: <vpqrg9$3agh2$1@dont-email.me>
References: <f73c3b97590a4d189e33a2cf255ed3337e56d3cf@i2pn2.org>
 <vpo6v9$2p51t$1@dont-email.me> <vppb4e$323f6$1@dont-email.me>
 <vpqcek$37v45$1@dont-email.me> <vpqdlg$382vq$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 28 Feb 2025 00:12:10 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="de9c75e0e594a6c6f2c98c0fd19b8497";
	logging-data="3490338"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+GSxOz86Ny1PAFXW8vU06d"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:N3n0N3KZ9s30fKeHeXpNQVptdog=
In-Reply-To: <vpqdlg$382vq$2@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-US
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250227-10, 2/27/2025), Outbound message
Bytes: 4025

On 2/27/2025 1:15 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
> Op 27.feb.2025 om 19:55 schreef olcott:
>> On 2/27/2025 3:26 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>>> Op 27.feb.2025 om 00:09 schreef olcott:
>>>> On 2/26/2025 3:52 PM, joes wrote:
>>>>> Since there is so much talk around, but not really about it,
>>>>> let's take a look:
>>>>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/
>>>>> 48b4cbfeb3f486507276a5fc4e9b10875ab24dbf/Halt7.c#L1081
>>>>> In line 1137, we compute a flag:
>>>>> u32 Root = Init_Halts_HH(&Aborted, &execution_trace, &decoded, 
>>>>> &code_end,
>>>>> (u32)P, &master_state, &slave_state, &slave_stack);
>>>>> In line 918, we find it basically checks for the magic number
>>>>> **execution_trace==0x90909090. What is this unexplained value?
>>>>>
>>>>> We then pass the saved flag in line 1143:
>>>>> if (Decide_Halting_HH(&Aborted, &execution_trace, &decoded,
>>>>> code_end, End_Of_Code, &master_state, &slave_state, &slave_stack, 
>>>>> Root)),
>>>>> defined in line 1030.
>>>>> Then we get a switch:
>>>>> 1059    if (Root)  // Master UTM halt decider
>>>>> Line 1070 is then conditionally skipped:
>>>>> Needs_To_Be_Aborted_HH((Decoded_Line_Of_Code*)**execution_trace);
>>>>> defined in line 1012, which (on a jmp or call instruction) calls
>>>>> u32 Needs_To_Be_Aborted_Trace_HH(Decoded_Line_Of_Code* 
>>>>> execution_trace,
>>>>>                                   Decoded_Line_Of_Code *current)
>>>>> in line 964, where the abort logic lives. (It basically triggers
>>>>> on a call or jump to itself.)
>>>>>
>>>>> So we only abort depending on the address of the execution trace.
>>>>> This makes no sense. Why is that?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> DD emulated by HHH according to the behavior that the x86
>>>> machine code of DD cannot possibly terminate normally thus
>>>> HHH is infallibly correct to report that this DD emulated
>>>> by HHH (not any other DD in the whole freaking universe)
>>>> is not-terminating.
>>> No, it is correct to report that HHH is unable to correctly simulate 
>>> this halting program up to its end.
>>
>> That you do not comprehend that infinite recursion
>> DOES NOT END is your ignorance.
> I never said that there is an infinite recursion.

It seems that you simply lack sufficient technical
competence to understand these things.

You could prove otherwise by providing any relevant
example of your technical competence in the software
engineering aspects that we are discussing.

If your "technical competence" is having once skimmed
a comp theory textbook and you never did any programming
then you will never understand what I am saying.



-- 
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer