Path: ...!feed.opticnetworks.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory,sci.logic Subject: Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 09:27:58 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 103 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:27:59 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8e198617313100a552662932ac49ce17"; logging-data="3553154"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/UkJSOZ4qd6EOXeY9YjwlZ" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:BXhINdWYZ41BAaZcACjAcln4tMA= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 4968 On 6/28/2024 3:23 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: > Op 27.jun.2024 om 19:30 schreef olcott: >> >> When you prove that you are totally overwhelmed and confused >> by the original issue I break it down into simpler steps. >> >> If you don't have a slight clue about the C programming >> language then the first step is you must learn this language >> otherwise it is like trying to talk to someone about >> differential calculus that does not know how to count to ten. > > If... But since this if does not apply, the the is irrelevant. > You keep repeating irrelevant texts to hide that you cannot show any > error in my reasoning. > >> >> typedef void (*ptr)(); >> int H0(ptr P); >> >> void Infinite_Loop() >> { >>    HERE: goto HERE; >> } >> >> void Infinite_Recursion() >> { >>    Infinite_Recursion(); >> } >> >> void DDD() >> { >>    H0(DDD); >> } >> >> int main() >> { >>    H0(Infinite_Loop); >>    H0(Infinite_Recursion); >>    H0(DDD); >> } >> >> Every C programmer that knows what an x86 emulator is knows that when H0 >> emulates the machine language of Infinite_Loop, Infinite_Recursion, and >> DDD that it must abort these emulations so that itself can terminate >> normally. >> >> When this is construed as non-halting criteria then simulating >> termination analyzer H0 is correct to reject these inputs as non-halting >> by returning 0 to its caller. >> >> Simulating termination analyzers must report on the behavior that their >> finite string input specifies thus H0 must report that DDD correctly >> emulated by H0 remains stuck in recursive simulation. >> > > Another attempt to distract from the subject.You claim you are not > talking about halt-deciders or termination analyzers, but now you bring > them up again. > https://liarparadox.org/HHH(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf I only do this because you have gotten overwhelmed. I prove my point step-by-step and because you don't understand any of the steps you leap to the conclusion that I am wrong. > We are discussing an H0 that aborts after two cycles. I do not tolerate > to go away from this point. > I updated all of my names in my code. // HHH(DDD) and HHH1(DDD) are the standard names for DDD input // DDD calls HHH(DDD). HHH1 is identical to HHH. // HH(DD,DD) and HH1(DD,DD) are the standard names for (DD,DD) input // DD calls HH(DD,DD) and HH1 is identical to HH. You haven't shown that you even understand that Infinite_Recursion() doesn't halt. You must understand this before you can understand the more complex example of DDD. > The examples of Infinite_Loop and Infinite_Recursion do not apply. They > are completely different from an H0 that aborts after two cycles. > > The last example can be formulated much simpler: > >        int main() >        { >          return H(main, 0); >        } > That example is merely a more difficult to understand version of HHH(DDD). If you can't even understand that Infinite_Recursion() doesn't halt you won't be able to understand the more complex example of DDD. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer