Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Keith Thompson Newsgroups: comp.theory Subject: Re: Incorrect requirements --- Computing the mapping from the input to HHH(DD) Date: Thu, 08 May 2025 19:02:01 -0700 Organization: None to speak of Lines: 62 Message-ID: <87jz6qczja.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> References: <87msbmeo3b.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> <875xiaejzg.fsf@nosuchdomain.example.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Date: Fri, 09 May 2025 04:02:02 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="302a6dd640940106301f9e87fdade96e"; logging-data="2450542"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX18Lz2q7/52dXMAPwssKWMU9" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cancel-Lock: sha1:dtpURfZtxWPCCacmleZJ2GxEMhk= sha1:TfA5mWqL1Y9ByXNu4P4Wn1eM8Go= olcott writes: > On 5/8/2025 6:54 PM, Keith Thompson wrote: >> olcott 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. You see, this is something you've gotten wrong, and you need somebody who can explain that to you in terms you can understand and accept. > 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. Is there any reason you couldn't have written that as follows? void DDD(void) { HHH(DDD); } You could then talk about it not reaching its closing brace rather than not reaching its "return" instruction. BTW, it's correctly called a "return statement" in C; dropping it would make it easier to avoid your incorrect use of terminology. (Assembly or machine code has "instructions"; C has "statements" and "declarations".) > DDD correctly simulated by HHH is the same thing > as infinite recursion between HHH and DDD yet is > implemented as recursive simulation. Sure, infinite recursion is infinite, regardless of how it's implemented, assuming it's implemented correctly. That's so trivally obvious that I simply don't believe that "the comp.sci" people are failing to understand it -- though I can believe that you believe it. >> I doubt that any such person exists, but only for reasons related >> to you. >> -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */