Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Mikko Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Failure to meet this challenge proves that all of my reviewers are wrong Date: Tue, 4 Mar 2025 12:08:41 +0200 Organization: - Lines: 82 Message-ID: References: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Tue, 04 Mar 2025 11:08:42 +0100 (CET) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="7e56ab57382a496fff06f6363741e829"; logging-data="1927587"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19dTx4/T/eRun5deVukvHOF" User-Agent: Unison/2.2 Cancel-Lock: sha1:ln1ubSD/NBWgtxRujXHBW9HhipM= On 2025-03-03 19:46:30 +0000, olcott said: > On 3/3/2025 6:46 AM, Mikko wrote: >> On 2025-03-02 19:06:52 +0000, olcott said: >> >>> On 3/2/2025 12:38 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote: >>>> Op 02.mrt.2025 om 15:42 schreef olcott: >>>>> HHH is an emulating termination analyzer that emulates >>>>> the x86 machine code located at the address of a function >>>>> using a fully functional x86 emulator. >>>>> >>>>> When HHH recognizes a non-terminating pattern in the >>>>> execution trace of its emulated input it aborts this >>>>> emulation and returns 0. >>>>> >>>>> typedef void (*ptr)(); >>>>> int HHH(ptr P); >>>>> >>>>> int DD() >>>>> { >>>>>    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD); >>>>>    if (Halt_Status) >>>>>      HERE: goto HERE; >>>>>    return Halt_Status; >>>>> } >>>>> >>>>> _DD() >>>>> [00002133] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping >>>>> [00002134] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping >>>>> [00002136] 51         push ecx      ; make space for local >>>>> [00002137] 6833210000 push 00002133 ; push DD >>>>> [0000213c] e882f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DD) >>>>> [00002141] 83c404     add esp,+04 >>>>> [00002144] 8945fc     mov [ebp-04],eax >>>>> [00002147] 837dfc00   cmp dword [ebp-04],+00 >>>>> [0000214b] 7402       jz 0000214f >>>>> [0000214d] ebfe       jmp 0000214d >>>>> [0000214f] 8b45fc     mov eax,[ebp-04] >>>>> [00002152] 8be5       mov esp,ebp >>>>> [00002154] 5d         pop ebp >>>>> [00002155] c3         ret >>>>> Size in bytes:(0035) [00002155] >>>>> >>>>> I challenged everyone here to provide the machine address >>>>> by machine address (AKA line by line) execution trace >>>>> of DD correctly emulated by HHH that reaches its own >>>>> "ret" instruction. >>>> >>>> Olcott could as well challenge everyone to draw a correct square circle. >>>> >>>>> >>>>> No one made any attempt to do this because they know that >>>>> this would prove that they are stupidly wrong to say that >>>>> my trace is incorrect. >>>>> >>>> >>>> No one will attempt to draw a square circle. Does that imply that it is >>>> wrong to say that another failed attempt to draw a square circle is >>>> incorrect? >>>> >>>> Similarly, HHH cannot possibly simulate itself correctly. >>> >>> This C code conclusively proves that HHH does correctly >>> emulate self emulating DD correctly. >>> https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c >> >> A C code does not prove. Only a proof would prove. > > The C code proves exactly these things. No, it does not. That you can insist that it would indicates that you don't know what the word means. > That you can't even understand that it does prove > those things shows even less technical competence. One doesn't need much techincal competence to tell the difference between a C code and a proof. -- Mikko