Re: Anyone with sufficient knowledge of C knows that DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH

On 2/9/25 2:57 PM, olcott wrote:

On 2/9/2025 1:39 PM, joes wrote:

Am Sun, 09 Feb 2025 10:49:51 -0600 schrieb olcott:

On 2/9/2025 10:43 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 09.feb.2025 om 17:37 schreef olcott:

On 2/9/2025 9:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 09.feb.2025 om 16:15 schreef olcott:

On 2/9/2025 2:09 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 09.feb.2025 om 07:04 schreef olcott:

On 2/8/2025 3:49 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 08.feb.2025 om 15:43 schreef olcott:

On 2/8/2025 3:54 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 08.feb.2025 om 00:13 schreef olcott:

>

The input to HHH(DD) cannot possibly terminate normally. Referring
to some other DD does not change this verfied fact.
>

That DD halts is a verified fact.

The input to HHH(DD) DOES NOT HALT !!!

>
It is a verified fact that the finite string describes a halting
program. Du to a bug, HHH does not see that, because it investigates
only the first few instructions of DD. HHH is unable to process the
call from DD to HHH correctly.

>
DD simulated by HHH cannot possibly terminate normally. DD simulated by
HHH does specify the behavioral basis of the Boolean termination value
of the DD input to HHH.

>
DD terminates, and HHH can’t simulate it normally.
>

 That is not the same DD as the input to HHH(DD).
That DD has an entirely different execution trace.
 

What is different about it?
Same code, so same program.
Or, are you saying you LIED when you made the string representation for the input.
You are just admitting that you are nothing but a lying FRAUD.