Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Every sufficiently competent C programmer knows --- Semantic
 Property of Finite String
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 08:43:47 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 49
Message-ID: <vr0mnl$r728$4@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$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2025 08:43:49 +0100 (CET)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="2309bdc4e851ad7a0f935340aeac3006";
	logging-data="891976"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX185epRpBVuMChCHUpGv+9oT"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:VTI2X8/a8VRlyvdf7Yj12vaTNdc=
Content-Language: nl, en-GB
In-Reply-To: <vr02sg$ad6n$1@dont-email.me>

Op 14.mrt.2025 om 03:05 schreef olcott:
> 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.
It has. If not, show the first instruction simulated differently by HHH 
and HHH1.