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: Every sufficiently competent C programmer knows --- Semantic
 Property of Finite String
Date: Thu, 13 Mar 2025 23:26:21 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <vr0b5f$kdnp$1@dont-email.me>
References: <vqntaq$1jut5$1@dont-email.me> <vqp388$1tvqa$1@dont-email.me>
 <vqpdv9$202b2$2@dont-email.me> <vqperb$20c9k$2@dont-email.me>
 <E6mcnWv3nMa66036nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <vqs2n8$2knng$1@dont-email.me>
 <5429f6c8b8a8a79e06b4aeefe677cc54a2a636bf@i2pn2.org>
 <vqt9jp$2spcd$6@dont-email.me> <vqtag4$2t2hb$2@dont-email.me>
 <vqtgl0$2u7fo$1@dont-email.me>
 <924e22fc46d629b311b16a954dd0bed980a0a094@i2pn2.org>
 <vqvg7s$3s1qt$3@dont-email.me>
 <9e1b767d1ab11da5dc6f6fa164cae8d8deeada2b@i2pn2.org>
 <vr02sg$ad6n$1@dont-email.me>
 <522103270556f743def44da9e3ad865fe1216904@i2pn2.org>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 05:26:24 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="0c8048211c03386b5231e23d6f950ce1";
	logging-data="669433"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18xYtYkdky3RDrXB3gzF6Gz"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:YZMwSAd0CxVkFHp7XsAzIPAigU0=
X-Antivirus-Status: Clean
X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250313-6, 3/13/2025), Outbound message
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <522103270556f743def44da9e3ad865fe1216904@i2pn2.org>
Bytes: 3680

On 3/13/2025 10:03 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 3/13/25 10:05 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 3/13/2025 6:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 3/13/25 4:46 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 3/13/2025 4:27 AM, joes wrote:
>>>>> Am Wed, 12 Mar 2025 21:41:34 -0500 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>> On 3/12/2025 7:56 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>> On 3/12/2025 8:41 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> NOT WHEN IT IS STIPULATED THAT THE BEHAVIOR BEING MEASURED IS
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The direct execution of DDD
>>>>>>
>>>>>> is proven to be different than the behavior of DDD emulated by HHH
>>>>>> according to the semantics of the x86 language.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which is weird, considering that a simulator should produce the same
>>>>> behaviour.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> DECIDERS ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT ON THE SEMANTIC OR SYNTACTIC 
>>>>>> PROPERTY OF
>>>>>> THEIR INPUT FINITE STRINGS.
>>>>> And not if the input called a different simulator that didn't abort.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> DDD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly
>>>> reach its own final state no matter what HHH
>>>> does.
>>>>
>>>> DDD correctly emulated by HHH1 does reach its
>>>> own final state.
>>>
>>> Which shows that HHH doesn't correctly emulate its input, unless you 
>>> just lied and gave the two programs different inputs.
>>>
>>
>> void DDD()
>> {
>>    HHH(DDD);
>>    return;
>> }
>>
>> Someone that is not a liar could explain exactly
>> how DDD emulated by HHH according to the semantics
>> of the C language must have the same behavior as
>> DDD emulated by HHH1 according to the semantics
>> of the C language.
> 
> WHy? The above is NOT a program, as to be a program it needs the full 
> code of HHH included.
> 

That would be too confusing for this simple thought experiment.
The behavior of HHH is already fully specified.

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