Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant?

typedef void (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);
void Infinite_Loop()
{
   HERE: goto HERE;
}
void Infinite_Recursion()
{
   Infinite_Recursion();
}
void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
}
int main()
{
   HHH(Infinite_Loop);
   HHH(Infinite_Recursion);
   HHH(DDD);
}
Every C programmer that knows what an x86 emulator is knows
that when HHH emulates the machine language of Infinite_Loop,
Infinite_Recursion, and DDD that it must abort these emulations
so that itself can terminate normally.
When this is construed as non-halting criteria then simulating
termination analyzer HHH is correct to reject these inputs as
non-halting by returning 0 to its caller.
Simulating termination analyzers must report on the behavior
that their finite string input specifies thus HHH must report
that DDD correctly emulated by HHH remains stuck in recursive
simulation.
Everyone else seems to be flat out dishonest or totally ignorant.
At least one of my reviewers does not seem to understand that
infinite recursion does not halt.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer