Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.lang.c
Subject: Re: Proving the: Simulating termination analyzer Principle
Date: Sat, 5 Apr 2025 20:34:02 -0400
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <vssi5o$389d8$11@dont-email.me>
References: <vss56v$375du$2@dont-email.me> <vss6ie$389d8$3@dont-email.me>
 <vss7av$375du$8@dont-email.me> <vss7em$389d8$5@dont-email.me>
 <vssa6p$3b2j0$2@dont-email.me> <vssaot$389d8$8@dont-email.me>
 <vsshvo$3ipb5$2@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sun, 06 Apr 2025 02:34:01 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="bdf677863da665303917a0e1a85da663";
	logging-data="3417512"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/tQ2E3wYaKYwqN+LQQOkqW"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:i5LE3q9Qx+zJ9qc0Kz5RkLEaEnw=
Content-Language: en-US
In-Reply-To: <vsshvo$3ipb5$2@dont-email.me>
Bytes: 3002

On 4/5/2025 8:30 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 4/5/2025 5:27 PM, dbush wrote:
>> On 4/5/2025 6:18 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>> On 05/04/2025 22:31, dbush wrote:
>>>> On 4/5/2025 5:29 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 4/5/2025 4:15 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/5/2025 4:52 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> *Simulating termination analyzer Principle*
>>>>>>> It is always correct for any simulating termination
>>>>>>> analyzer to stop simulating and reject any input that
>>>>>>> would otherwise prevent its own termination.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>>>> {
>>>>>>>     HHH(DDD);
>>>>>>>     return;
>>>>>>> }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Except when doing so would change the input, as is the case with 
>>>>>> HHH and DDD.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Changing the input is not allowed.
>>>>>
>>>>> You may disagree that the above definition
>>>>> of simulating termination analyzer is correct.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is self-evident that HHH must stop simulating
>>>>> DDD to prevent its own non-termination.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Changing the input is not allowed.
>>>
>>> You're right, but it doesn't matter very much as long as terminates() 
>>> *always* gets the answer right for any arbitrary program tape and any 
>>> data tape. Mr Olcott's fails to do that.
>>>
>>
>> Of course you're correct. His criteria is basically what happens if 
>> you replace the code of X with a pure simulator and run X(Y) for some Y.
>>
> 
> Everyone else seems to think that the correct way
> to handle a pathological relationship between an
> input and a termination analyzer is to simply ignore
> the differences that this makes. THAT CAN'T BE RIGHT !!!
> 

Ignoring the relationship is exactly what you do when you change the 
code of HHH, thereby changing the input.

Changing the input is not allowed.