Re: Can D simulated by H terminate normally?

olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/29/2024 9:37 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:

On 4/28/2024 1:39 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 4/28/24 2:19 PM, olcott wrote:

[ .... ]

Even the term "halting" is problematic.
For 15 years I thought it means stops running for any reason.

[ .... ]

Having been aborted (if such were possible) is merely another final state
for a TM.

No it definitely is not.

In a TM, each state is either a final state or a non-final state.  Are
you arguing for a third alternative, or do you think that "having been
aborted" is a non-final state?  If the latter, what state does the TM
change to next?

When the payroll system crashes 10% of the way through calculating
payroll we cannot say that everyone has been paid.

Of course not, but it has nevertheless reached a final state, an
unsatisfactory one, since it is no longer running on the computer.

Yet again only rhetoric with no actual reasoning.
Do you believe:
(a) Halting means stopping for any reason.
(b) Halting means reaching a final state.

(a) and (b) are identical.  A TM having stopped means it has reached a
final state, and vice versa.

No that is incorrect.

Perhaps, then, you could explain the difference between (a) and (b).

In software engineering terms halting means reaching a final
state and terminating normally.

"Halting" is about turing machines.  I don't think you've ever said what
you mean by "terminating normally".  A turing machine either reaches a
final state or it doesn't.  There is no concept of "normal termination"
in a TM.

(c) Neither.

--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).