Path: ...!news.mixmin.net!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: HHH maps its input to the behavior specified by it --- never reaches its halt state Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2024 09:58:34 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 56 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Fri, 09 Aug 2024 16:58:35 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="bb86fb6b7518b299c8da34bf84593b17"; logging-data="825195"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+7xla6Zsce3hZSFSSZJt65" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:2/C3mixWcReQvfLxpXHtpGTVxCA= In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Bytes: 3379 On 8/9/2024 4:22 AM, Mikko wrote: > On 2024-08-08 18:45:00 +0000, olcott said: > >> >> x86 machine code is a 100% exact and concrete specification. > > But has too many unimportant details. > *After we get agreement on this* (a) The "return" instruction is the halt state of DDD. (b) DDD correctly emulated by any HHH never reaches this state. Then we move on to the last step we I prove how important a 100% concrete specification is. >> C is a little more vague and hides the details. > > With C it is possible to write unambigous programs. It is not > as easy as with many other languages because C is usually > used for purposes where implementation dependnet behaviour > need not be avoided. > >> typedef void (*ptr)(); >> int HHH(ptr P); // simulating termination analyzer >> >> void DDD() >> { >>    HHH(DDD); >>    return; >> } >> >> Each HHH of every HHH that can possibly exist definitely >> emulates zero to infinity instructions of DDD correctly. >> Every expert in the C language sees that this emulated DDD >> cannot possibly reaches its own "return" instruction halt state. >> >> Every rebuttal that anyone can possibly make is necessarily >> erroneous because the above paragraph is a tautology. >> >> HHH computes the mapping from its finite string of x86 machine >> code to the actual behavior that this finite string specifies >> which includes recursive emulation. > > It is not useful to repeat what has already been said. You should > always improve, at least the presentation. If you cant find any > other improvemnt you should at least correct the worst typo. > *Until we get agreement on this I am not talking about anything else* (a) The "return" instruction is the halt state of DDD. (b) DDD correctly emulated by any HHH never reaches this state. -- Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer