Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 2025-07-07 03:12:30 +0000, olcott said:To people that never had any actual understanding and
On 7/6/2025 9:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:Unless you can quote some respectable author your prohibitions areOn 7/6/25 4:06 PM, olcott wrote:>On 7/6/2025 12:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 7/6/25 11:19 AM, olcott wrote:>>>
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
>
*EVERY BOT FIGURES THIS OUT ON ITS OWN*
No, it just isn't smart enough to detect that you lied in your premise.
>There is no way that DDD simulated by HHH (according>
to the semantics of the C programming language)
can possibly reach its own "return" statement final
halt state.
And there is no way for HHH to correctly simulate its input and return an answer
>
You insistence that a non-terminating input be simulated
until non-existent completion is especially nuts because
you have been told about this dozens of times.
>
What the F is wrong with you?
>
It seems you don't understand those words.
>
I don't say that the decider needs to simulate the input to completion, but that it needs to be able to actually PROVE that if this exact input WAS given to a correct simultor (which won't be itself, since it isn't doing the complete simulation) will run for an unbounded number of steps.
No decider is ever allowed to report on anything
besides the actual behavior that its input actually
specifies.
meaningless.
Outside of the domain is a more precise way of saying it.Most people here don't get that because they have noDo you even understand what the word "allowed" means?
actual depth of understanding. They can only parrot
the words of textbooks.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.