Anyone that disagrees with this is not telling the truth --- V5

*Everything that is not expressly stated below is*
*specified as unspecified*
void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
_DDD()
[00002172] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
[0000217f] 83c404     add esp,+04
[00002182] 5d         pop ebp
[00002183] c3         ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
*It is a basic fact that DDD emulated by HHH according to*
*the semantics of the x86 language cannot possibly stop*
*running unless aborted* (out of memory error excluded)
X = DDD emulated by HHH∞ according to the semantics of the x86 language
Y = HHH∞ never aborts its emulation of DDD
Z = DDD never stops running
The above claim boils down to this: (X ∧ Y) ↔ Z
x86utm takes the compiled Halt7.obj file of this c program
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
Thus making all of the code of HHH directly available to
DDD and itself. HHH emulates itself emulating DDD.
void EEE()
{
   HERE: goto HERE;
}
HHHn correctly predicts the behavior of DDD the same
way that HHHn correctly predicts the behavior of EEE.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer