Deutsch English Français Italiano |
<vq3al4$16jdc$1@dont-email.me> View for Bookmarking (what is this?) Look up another Usenet article |
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: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Kicking the straw-man deception out on its ass Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2025 22:19:48 -0600 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 72 Message-ID: <vq3al4$16jdc$1@dont-email.me> References: <vq2i40$ug75$3@dont-email.me> <aff6ceb585b4f024c238d901362389163051aac8@i2pn2.org> <vq2jpi$ug75$4@dont-email.me> <a5881effb7ea9a41f6e94ad6262ccd48d9e09cf3@i2pn2.org> <vq33oq$11qv8$1@dont-email.me> <cf64074c718d487c7610a4cca877b88d953452f5@i2pn2.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Mon, 03 Mar 2025 05:19:49 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0c603a0e41e8bbe90f18e13a3b679ac3"; logging-data="1265068"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/loYWbjOR989017hVGqu3c" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:BobmVAWdf9GLftqWo/e57siIPto= In-Reply-To: <cf64074c718d487c7610a4cca877b88d953452f5@i2pn2.org> X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250302-6, 3/2/2025), Outbound message Content-Language: en-US X-Antivirus-Status: Clean Bytes: 4069 On 3/2/2025 9:46 PM, Richard Damon wrote: > On 3/2/25 9:22 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 3/2/2025 6:42 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>> On 3/2/25 4:49 PM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 3/2/2025 3:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>>> On 3/2/25 4:21 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> int DD() >>>>>> { >>>>>> int Halt_Status = HHH(DD); >>>>>> if (Halt_Status) >>>>>> HERE: goto HERE; >>>>>> return Halt_Status; >>>>>> } >>>>>> >>>>>> _DD() >>>>>> [00002133] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping >>>>>> [00002134] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping >>>>>> [00002136] 51 push ecx ; make space for local >>>>>> [00002137] 6833210000 push 00002133 ; push DD >>>>>> [0000213c] e882f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DD) >>>>>> [00002141] 83c404 add esp,+04 >>>>>> [00002144] 8945fc mov [ebp-04],eax >>>>>> [00002147] 837dfc00 cmp dword [ebp-04],+00 >>>>>> [0000214b] 7402 jz 0000214f >>>>>> [0000214d] ebfe jmp 0000214d >>>>>> [0000214f] 8b45fc mov eax,[ebp-04] >>>>>> [00002152] 8be5 mov esp,ebp >>>>>> [00002154] 5d pop ebp >>>>>> [00002155] c3 ret >>>>>> Size in bytes:(0035) [00002155] >>>>>> >>>>>> DD emulated by HHH according to the behavior that DD >>>>>> specifies cannot possibly reach its own "ret" instruction >>>>>> and terminate normally. >>>>> >>>>> WHich only shows that HHH can not correctly emulate its input and >>>>> give an answer. >>>>> >>>> >>>> The fact that HHH does correctly determine that DD >>>> emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own "ret" >>>> instruction and terminate normally proves that your >>>> claim is counter factual. >>> >>> You say that, but it isn't true, >> >> You keep trying to get away with saying that the >> fact that DD calls its own emulator in recursive >> emulation does not change the behavior from the >> behavior of the directly executed DD. >> >> AT THIS POINT THAT BECOMES VERY STUPIDLY WRONG. >> SINCE WE KNOW THAT YOU ARE NOT THAT STUPID WHAT ELSE IS LEFT? >> >> > > And you keep on making the claim without evidence!!!! > > > What instruction acted differently between the to, that was directly > executied and correctly emulated to different results. > The call to HHH(DD) from the directly executed DD returns to DD. The call to HHH(DD) from DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly return BECAUSE IT CALLS ITS OWN EMULATOR. I never said it that clearly ever before. -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer