Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 3/13/2025 6:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:On 3/13/25 4:46 PM, olcott wrote:On 3/13/2025 4:27 AM, joes wrote:Am Wed, 12 Mar 2025 21:41:34 -0500 schrieb olcott:On 3/12/2025 7:56 PM, dbush wrote:Which is weird, considering that a simulator should produce the sameOn 3/12/2025 8:41 PM, olcott wrote:is proven to be different than the behavior of DDD emulated by HHH>The direct execution of DDD
NOT WHEN IT IS STIPULATED THAT THE BEHAVIOR BEING MEASURED IS
according to the semantics of the x86 language.
behaviour.
I mean, HHH and HHH1 are both simulators, the former just aborts.Someone that is not a liar could explain exactly how DDD emulated by HHHWhich shows that HHH doesn't correctly emulate its input, unless youDDD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own finalDECIDERS ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT ON THE SEMANTIC OR SYNTACTICAnd not if the input called a different simulator that didn't abort.
PROPERTY OF THEIR INPUT FINITE STRINGS.
state no matter what HHH does.
DDD correctly emulated by HHH1 does reach its own final state.
just lied and gave the two programs different inputs.
according to the semantics of the C language must have the same behavior
as DDD emulated by HHH1 according to the semantics of the C language.
Someone that is a liar will perpetually dodge this challenge.--
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.