Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Sequence of sequence, selection and iteration matters
Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 16:09:57 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 51
Message-ID: <v6m4nk$1uean$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v6e7va$c4sv$1@dont-email.me> <v6g444$pdc2$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6go4d$sg7f$1@dont-email.me> <v6ikv5$19h6q$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6jguf$1ctoi$5@dont-email.me> <v6ji1d$1dpoc$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6jig0$1ctoi$11@dont-email.me> <v6jkib$1e3jq$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6jpe5$1eul0$1@dont-email.me> <v6jpqo$1e3jq$2@dont-email.me>
 <v6jqfg$1eul0$2@dont-email.me> <v6k6md$1h3a7$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6k9ef$1hicb$1@dont-email.me> <v6lc9v$1q8jn$1@dont-email.me>
 <v6lva1$1tj30$1@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2024 16:09:57 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="ed324ae554c0f53fe92fe56911420f63";
	logging-data="2046295"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/A44m906mNJCI+8swY7MnZ"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:6iLJ8SCqUQOUUXgM+Kagl9gYyPQ=
In-Reply-To: <v6lva1$1tj30$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 3224

Op 10.jul.2024 om 14:37 schreef olcott:
> On 7/10/2024 2:13 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 09.jul.2024 om 23:18 schreef olcot
> _DDD()
> [00002163] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
> [00002164] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
> [00002166] 6863210000 push 00002163 ; push DDD
> [0000216b] e853f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DDD)
> 
> DDD correctly emulated by any pure function HHH that
> correctly emulates 1 to ∞ steps of DDD can't make it
> past the above line of code no matter what.
> 
> [00002170] 83c404     add esp,+04
> [00002173] 5d         pop ebp
> [00002174] c3         ret
> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002174]
>>
>> Which proves that HHH does not interpret x86 code correctly. 
> 
> *It interprets the code correctly*
> https://github.com/wfeldt/libx86emu

Simulating a halting program only halfway and then abort it, is an 
incorrect simulation.

void Finite_Recursion (int N) {
   if (N > 0) Finite_Recursion (N - 1);
}

Your knowledge of x86 seems to be failing. There is no reason to abort a 
halting program halfway its simulation.

> 
> Your understanding of correctly incorrectly diverges
> from the semantics of the x86 language making you wrong.
> You responded to the wrong version of my post.

You seem to have an invalid understanding of x86. It never indicates 
that a halting program should be aborted halfway its simulation.

> 
>> So, the set of HHH that correctly emulates is empty.
> This is only your ignorance.
> 

You failed to indicate why it is a good idea to abort a halting program 
halfway its simulation.
You seem to be stuck in infinite invalid reasoning.
Wishing it is correct very very much does not make it correct.