Path: ...!3.eu.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.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: This function proves that only the outermost HHH examines the
 execution trace
Date: Thu, 1 Aug 2024 14:52:36 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 55
Message-ID: <v8g0el$24u77$1@dont-email.me>
References: <v80h07$2su8m$3@dont-email.me>
 <0amdndFJSZSzYD77nZ2dnZfqnPednZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <v8102f$2vo8u$1@dont-email.me> <v83fhe$3gihn$1@dont-email.me>
 <v83hmk$3gvj7$1@dont-email.me> <v83jc9$3gihm$1@dont-email.me>
 <v83juc$3ham9$1@dont-email.me> <v8519e$3s7bv$1@dont-email.me>
 <v88h9e$i7kl$7@dont-email.me> <v8a31r$u7n5$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8btl5$184u7$3@dont-email.me> <v8cval$1hf7s$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8dshi$1mg72$4@dont-email.me> <v8fes7$22of5$1@dont-email.me>
 <v8fti6$24rl1$8@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2024 14:52:37 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="8c0ac17c3f9e00decd2248743b2f1a16";
	logging-data="2259175"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19CJqEG8u9tr4/8P6diSjmy"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:SzigvMXg8tOEB3une4Vxc0GvcSk=
In-Reply-To: <v8fti6$24rl1$8@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: en-GB
Bytes: 3788

Op 01.aug.2024 om 14:03 schreef olcott:
> On 8/1/2024 2:52 AM, Mikko wrote:
>> On 2024-07-31 17:33:38 +0000, olcott said:
>>
>>> On 7/31/2024 4:15 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>> On 2024-07-30 23:40:21 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>
>>>>> On 7/30/2024 2:00 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>> On 2024-07-29 16:50:53 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 7/28/2024 3:59 AM, Mikko wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 2024-07-27 20:05:31 +0000, olcott said:
>>>>>>>>> If you had sufficient understanding of the x86 language
>>>>>>>>> you would know that DDD is correctly emulated by HHH.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> If you had suffient understanding of x86 language and correctness
>>>>>>>> you would know that DDD is incorrectly emnulated by HHH.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is only seems that way because every reviewer makes sure
>>>>>>> to ignore one aspect of the basis of another.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is perfectly OK to ignore irrelevant details. A relevant detail
>>>>>> is the meaning of the word "emulate" as that determines what is a
>>>>>> correct emulation and what is not.
>>>>>
>>>>> *It is not OK to ignore*
>>>>>
>>>>> This algorithm is used by all the simulating termination analyzers:
>>>>> <MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
>>>>>      If simulating halt decider *H correctly simulates its input D*
>>>>>      *until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never*
>>>>>      *stop running unless aborted* then
>>>>>
>>>>>      H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
>>>>>      specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
>>>>> </MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
>>>>>
>>>>> for DDD correctly emulated by HHH until...
>>>>
>>>> It is as Sipser does not say whether DDD is correctly simulated by HHH
>>>> or what would constitute a correct simulation.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This has already been fully established elsewhere.
>>
>> You have never shown any proof about either "correctly".
>>
> 
> When instructions are executed/emulated according to the
> semantics of the x86 language then they are executed/emulated
> correctly.
> 

But only those instructions. A halting program is simulated correctly if 
no instructions are skipped.