Re: Everyone on this forum besides Keith has been a damned liar about this point

On 6/10/2025 7:01 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-06-09 14:46:30 +0000, olcott said:
 

On 6/9/2025 6:24 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/8/25 10:50 PM, olcott wrote:

void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
>
The *input* to simulating termination analyzer HHH(DDD)
specifies recursive simulation that can never reach its
*simulated "return" instruction final halt state*
>
*Every rebuttal to this changes the words*
>

>
>
So, you think a partial simulation defines behavior?
>
Where do you get that LIE from?
>

>
void Infinite_Recursion()
{
   Infinite_Recursion();
}
>
void Infinite_Loop()
{
   HERE: goto HERE;
   return;
}
>
I am no so stupid that I require a complete
simulation of a non-terminating input.

 Yes you are. You just express your stupidity in another way.
 

It only takes two simulations of DDD by HHH for HHH
to correctly recognize a non-halting behavior pattern.
Unless you are very good at software engineering you
won't be able to begin to understand all of the
non-halting behavior patterns. Mike used the simplest
one: infinite loop.
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer