Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder9.news.weretis.net!news.nk.ca!rocksolid2!i2pn2.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Richard Damon Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Date: Mon, 1 Jul 2024 22:44:13 -0400 Organization: i2pn2 (i2pn.org) Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 2 Jul 2024 02:44:13 -0000 (UTC) Injection-Info: i2pn2.org; logging-data="1845994"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@i2pn2.org"; posting-account="diqKR1lalukngNWEqoq9/uFtbkm5U+w3w6FQ0yesrXg"; User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 Bytes: 5107 Lines: 91 On 7/1/24 10:34 PM, olcott wrote: > On 7/1/2024 9:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >> On 7/1/24 9:36 PM, olcott wrote: >>> On 7/1/2024 7:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote: >>>> On 7/1/24 8:59 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>> On 7/1/2024 3:23 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>>>> Op 30.jun.2024 om 19:20 schreef olcott: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> _DDD() >>>>>>> [00002172] 55               push ebp      ; housekeeping >>>>>>> [00002173] 8bec             mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping >>>>>>> [00002175] 6872210000       push 00002172 ; push DDD >>>>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff       call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD) >>>>>>> [0000217f] 83c404           add esp,+04 >>>>>>> [00002182] 5d               pop ebp >>>>>>> [00002183] c3               ret >>>>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> It cannot possibly return, because HHH aborts itself one cycle too >>>>>> early, showing that the emulation is incorrect. If that is over >>>>>> your head, try to learn how x86 instructions work. >>>>> >>>>> _DDD() >>>>> [00002172] 55               push ebp      ; housekeeping >>>>> [00002173] 8bec             mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping >>>>> [00002175] 6872210000       push 00002172 ; push DDD >>>>> [0000217a] e853f4ffff       call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD) >>>>> [0000217f] 83c404           add esp,+04 >>>>> [00002182] 5d               pop ebp >>>>> [00002183] c3               ret >>>>> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183] >>>>> >>>>> DDD is correctly emulated by HHH which calls an >>>>> emulated HHH(DDD) to repeat the process until aborted. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> CAN'T BE. >>>> >>>> A "Correct Emulation" is one that produces the same result as the >>>> program at the input. >>>> >>> >>> Which can only possibly occur be disregarding the semantics >>> of the x86 language. Liars would do that ignoramuses would do >>> that. Everyone with the equivalent of a BSCS would know that >>> what I said is true. >>> >>> >> >> Why do you say that? That is EXACTLY the definition of Correct Emulation. > > > WELL INDOCTRINATED FALSE ASSUMPTIONS ARE NOT TRUTH. > WELL INDOCTRINATED FALSE ASSUMPTIONS ARE NOT TRUTH. > WELL INDOCTRINATED FALSE ASSUMPTIONS ARE NOT TRUTH. And denying definitions is just lying. > > void Infinite_Loop() > { >   HERE: goto HERE; > } > > void Infinite_Recursion() > { >   Infinite_Recursion(); > } > > void DDD() > { >   HHH(DDD); > } > > Every C programmer that knows what an x86 emulator is knows > that when HHH emulates the machine language of Infinite_Loop, > Infinite_Recursion, and DDD that it must abort these emulations > so that itself can terminate normally. > > SO THESE THREE INPUTS DO NOT FREAKING HALT > SO THESE THREE INPUTS DO NOT FREAKING HALT > SO THESE THREE INPUTS DO NOT FREAKING HALT > No, DDD does halt if HHH is a decider and HHH(DDD) returns. The fact that HHH need to abort its emulation to be a decider doesn't mean it gets to be wrong about the question put to it as a halt decider. It just shows that Halting is not Computable.