Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
Op 11.jul.2025 om 16:27 schreef olcott:Strawman error.On 7/11/2025 3:55 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:Since HHH halts, DDD halts, too.Op 11.jul.2025 om 04:33 schreef olcott:>On 7/10/2025 9:10 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 7/10/25 8:27 PM, olcott wrote:>*I just proved the fact that*>
(1) HHH(DDD) is executed
(2) HHH emulates DDD
(3) emulated DDD calls an emulated HHH(DDD)
(4) emulated HHH emulates another instance of DDD
(5) this DDD calls HHH(DDD) again
https://liarparadox.org/HHH(DDD)_Full_Trace.pdf
>
Its OK if you are no good with the x86 language
and can't understand the code. I began programming
way back when x86 programming was popular.
>
Alternatively the details of how multi-tasking
works are too difficult for you. They are probably
too difficult for most programmers.
>
And thus you have proven my point that either you definition of what the input is, or what HHH does is just a lie.
>
But, it seems you are too stupid to understand that problem.
>
Your claims are:
>
1) The input contains only the code shown, and thus does not contain the code of HHH.
>
2) That HHH is simulating the input given to it, and thus JUST that input.
>
3) That HHH simulates the code of HHH.
>
The test program HHH is not the program under test DDD.
The program under test and the test program will never
stop running unless HHH aborts its DDD.
>
Another vague claim without evidence.
It not vague at all. You just don't know what
the words mean.
>If DDD is under test, then also all function called by DDD are under test, including HHH.>
Since neither HHH nor DDD will ever stop running
unless HHH aborts its DDD, non-halting criteria
has been met.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.