Sujet : Re: Every sufficiently competent C programmer knows --- Paraphrase of Sipser's agreement
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory comp.lang.c comp.lang.c++Suivi-à : comp.theoryDate : 16. Mar 2025, 02:28:27
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <vr59fr$m5ov$4@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 3/15/2025 5:35 PM, dbush wrote:
On 3/15/2025 5:27 PM, olcott wrote:
>
<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
stop running unless aborted then
>
H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
>
But he didn't agree to what you think he did:
THIS IS EXACTLY AND PRECISELY WHAT I THINK HE DID AGREE TO
(It took me years to form this precise paraphrase)
<Accurate Paraphrase>
If emulating termination analyzer H emulates its input
finite string D of x86 machine language instructions
according to the semantics of the x86 programming language
until H correctly determines that this emulated D cannot
possibly reach its own "ret" instruction in any finite
number of correctly emulated steps then
H can abort its emulation of input D and correctly report
that D specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</Accurate Paraphrase>
-- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
Every sufficiently competent C programmer knows
Re: Every sufficiently competent C programmer knows --- Stupid Mistake?
