Path: news.eternal-september.org!eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: olcott Newsgroups: comp.lang.c++ Subject: Re: DDD correctly simulated by HHH can't possibly reach its own "return" statement --- Liars on comp.theory Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2025 12:27:33 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 108 Message-ID: <103p8m5$vpr7$1@dont-email.me> References: <103mrs1$ar3e$1@dont-email.me> <80aa46a1ad3397065e575771d1ebe57f6a5c5588.camel@gmail.com> <103p0ad$tj08$2@dont-email.me> <103p0sf$tnu1$1@dont-email.me> <103p11e$u0ef$1@dont-email.me> <103p18v$tnu1$2@dont-email.me> <103p1qp$u424$1@dont-email.me> <103p2c5$tnu1$3@dont-email.me> <103p2o7$u9sa$1@dont-email.me> <103p34p$tnu1$4@dont-email.me> <103p3oj$u9sa$2@dont-email.me> <103p7s4$vm5t$1@dont-email.me> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2025 19:27:34 +0200 (CEST) Injection-Info: dont-email.me; posting-host="4c5709712fc7771c125bfe4c60a9c3b1"; logging-data="1042279"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19fR2EEkCc5LonVA5YBRfQ9" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cancel-Lock: sha1:3QnIF4RdULE/U8gW6UsVzjmCupU= Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <103p7s4$vm5t$1@dont-email.me> X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Antivirus: Norton (VPS 250628-4, 6/28/2025), Outbound message On 6/28/2025 12:13 PM, dbush wrote: > On 6/28/2025 12:03 PM, olcott wrote: >> On 6/28/2025 10:52 AM, dbush wrote: >>> On 6/28/2025 11:46 AM, olcott wrote: >>>> On 6/28/2025 10:39 AM, dbush wrote: >>>>> On 6/28/2025 11:30 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>> On 6/28/2025 10:21 AM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>> On 6/28/2025 11:17 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>> On 6/28/2025 10:14 AM, dbush wrote: >>>>>>>>> On 6/28/2025 11:04 AM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>> On 6/28/2025 2:43 AM, wij wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, 2025-06-27 at 14:36 -0500, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>>> I am only here for the validation of the behavior >>>>>>>>>>>> of DDD correctly simulated by HHH. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> The definition of HHH is missing. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> The definition is specified in this part that you >>>>>>>>>> dishonestly erased: >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> On 6/27/2025 2:36 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>>>>>  > Termination Analyzer HHH simulates its input until >>>>>>>>>>  > it detects a non-terminating behavior pattern. When >>>>>>>>>>  > HHH detects such a pattern it aborts its simulation >>>>>>>>>>  > and returns 0. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> The dishonest one here is YOU, as it was not wij who snipped >>>>>>>>> the below in his reply but YOU: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> I stop at the first counter-factual mistake so I stop here. >>>>>>>> Everything else is ignored. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> In other words, you INTENTIONALLY don't read things that prove >>>>>>> you wrong. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 6/28/2025 2:43 AM, wij wrote: >>>>>>  > >>>>>>  > The definition of HHH is missing. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 6/27/2025 2:36 PM, olcott wrote: >>>>>>  > Termination Analyzer HHH simulates its input until >>>>>>  > it detects a non-terminating behavior pattern. When >>>>>>  > HHH detects such a pattern it aborts its simulation >>>>>>  > and returns 0. >>>>>>  > >>>>>> >>>>>> It is a verified fact that the definition of HHH was >>>>>> provided thus the claim that it was not provided is >>>>>> counter factual. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> No, you didn't give a definition of HHH, just gave a vauge >>>>> incomplete description of what you think it does. >>>>> >>>> >>>> It completely defines the generic notion of a simulating >>>> termination analyzer and >>>> >>>> It specifies every detail about HHH that is required >>>> to correctly determine whether or not DDD correctly >>>> simulated by HHH can possibly reach its own simulated >>>> "return" statement final halt state. >>>> >>> >>> But why would you say that when you've admitted on the record (see >>> below) that DDD is not in fact correctly simulated by HHH? >>> >> >> *I am not going to tolerate any misdirection to any other points* >> >> void DDD() >> { >>    HHH(DDD); >>    return; >> } >> >> The only point relevant to this forum is that DDD correctly >> simulated by HHH > > Is something that you have admitted on the record doesn't happen: > *This is the only point that I will address* *Any attempt at changing the subject will* *be construed as dishonest* int main() { HHH(DDD); DDD(); } Termination Analyzer HHH simulates its input until it detects a non-terminating behavior pattern. When HHH detects such a pattern it aborts its simulation and returns 0. Within the above specification DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own simulated "return" statement final halt state. -- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer