Re: Incorrect requirements --- Computing the mapping from the input to HHH(DD)

On 5/9/2025 7:38 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 5/9/25 8:29 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 10/05/2025 00:02, olcott wrote:

Correctly emulating one or more instructions <is>
the correct emulation of 1 or more instructions
of DD. This is a truism.

>
No, it's not. Correct emulation would entail accurately simulating the whole of DDD's behaviour.
>

  This is just typical Olcottian behavior, Actual definitons don't matter to him, which is what makes so much of what he says just turn out to be lies when they are interpreted (as they must be) with the actual definitions.

_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]
Try to show how DDD simulated by HHH according to the
rules of the x86 language reaches its own "ret"
instruction final state and you already know that
you will fail. You dodge this question so that
you can remain disagreeable.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer