Path: ...!eternal-september.org!feeder3.eternal-september.org!news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl>
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Incorrect requirements --- Computing the mapping from the input
 to HHH(DD)
Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 10:49:22 +0200
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 70
Message-ID: <vvn3uj$3dv8d$13@dont-email.me>
References: <vv97ft$3fg66$1@dont-email.me> <vvgq6o$1acph$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvgqgl$15i5e$27@dont-email.me> <vvgr22$1ag3a$2@dont-email.me>
 <vvgt36$1auqp$2@dont-email.me> <vvgtbe$1b0li$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvguot$1auqp$3@dont-email.me> <vvh0t2$1b939$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvhap5$1hp80$1@dont-email.me> <vvhf20$1ihs9$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvhfnd$1hvei$3@dont-email.me> <vvil99$1ugd5$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvinvp$1vglb$1@dont-email.me> <vviv75$222r6$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvj1fp$22a62$1@dont-email.me> <vvj2j6$23gk7$1@dont-email.me>
 <as9TP.251456$lZjd.93653@fx05.ams4> <87msbmeo3b.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <vvjcge$27753$2@dont-email.me> <vvjeqf$28555$1@dont-email.me>
 <vvjffg$28g5i$1@dont-email.me> <875xiaejzg.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com>
 <vvjgt1$28g5i$5@dont-email.me>
 <219295c65f6a06d6333fb06933346c88139a95be@i2pn2.org>
 <vvjm4h$28g5i$8@dont-email.me> <vvkgdu$2m36t$6@dont-email.me>
 <vvl8ue$2rl0l$15@dont-email.me>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Date: Sat, 10 May 2025 10:49:23 +0200 (CEST)
Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="6132ef5c9a5712f5fb4e052234097a74";
	logging-data="3603725"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org";	posting-account="U2FsdGVkX189LJ2PuFi0kOCe7WUH+8Di"
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird
Cancel-Lock: sha1:8ZKqxK+/cq04oHHyoaCS1CJ27YE=
In-Reply-To: <vvl8ue$2rl0l$15@dont-email.me>
Content-Language: nl, en-GB
Bytes: 4144

Op 09.mei.2025 om 18:02 schreef olcott:
> On 5/9/2025 4:03 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
>> Op 09.mei.2025 om 03:35 schreef olcott:
>>> On 5/8/2025 8:13 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/8/25 8:05 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/8/2025 6:54 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> writes:
>>>>>>> On 5/8/2025 6:30 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 08/05/2025 23:50, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> [...]
>>>>>>>>> If you are a competent C programmer
>>>>>>>> Keith Thompson is a highly-respected and very competent C
>>>>>>>> programmer.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Then he is just who I need*
>>>>>>
>>>>>> No, what you need is someone who is an expert in mathematical logic
>>>>>> (I am not) who can explain to you, in terms you can understand and
>>>>>> accept, where you've gone wrong.  Some expertise in C could also
>>>>>> be helpful.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The key gap in my proof is that none of the comp.sci
>>>>> people seems to have a slight clue about simple C
>>>>> programming.
>>>>
>>>> No, the problem is you don't.
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> void DDD()
>>>>> {
>>>>>    HHH(DDD);
>>>>>    return;
>>>>> }
>>>>>
>>>>> *THIS IS THE C PART THAT NO ONE HERE UNDERSTANDS*
>>>>> DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly
>>>>> reach its own "return" instruction.
>>>>
>>>> And claiming the behavior of a program that isn;t the behavior of 
>>>> that program is just a lie.
>>>>
>>>
>>> DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly
>>> reach its own "return" instruction.
>>>
>>> DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly
>>> reach its own "return" instruction.
>>>
>>> DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly
>>> reach its own "return" instruction.
>>>
>>
>>
>> No need to repeat vacuous statements. It does not matter how many 
>> times you multiply 0, it will remains 0.
>> DDD contains an HHH that aborts, 
> 
> void DDD()
> {
>    HHH(DDD);
>    return;
> }
> 
> When 1 or more statements of DDD are correctly
> simulated by HHH then this correctly simulated
> DDD cannot possibly reach its own “return statement”.
> 
No need to repeat that HHH fails to reach the end of the halting 
program. We understand it.