Re: Every D correctly simulated by H never reaches its final state and halts

On 2024-05-17 17:46:29 +0000, olcott said:

On 5/17/2024 11:00 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-05-17 15:30:01 +0000, olcott said:
 

On 5/17/2024 2:25 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 17.mei.2024 om 03:15 schreef olcott:

The following is self-evidently true on the basis of the
semantics of the C programming language.
 typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
00 int H(ptr x, ptr x);
01 int D(ptr x)
02 {
03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04   if (Halt_Status)
05     HERE: goto HERE;
06   return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 int main()
10 {
11   H(D,D);
12   return 0;
13 }
 In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly
emulates at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order
specified by the x86 instructions of D.
 This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H
in the order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling
H(D,D) in recursive simulation.
 Any H/D pair matching the above template where
D(D) is simulated by the same H(D,D) that it calls
cannot possibly reach its own line 06 and halt.
 *This is a simple software engineering verified fact*
 

 Note that olcott defines 'verified fact' as 'proven fact', but he is unable to show the proof. So, it must be read as 'my belief'.

 It is self-evidently true to anyone having sufficient knowledge
of the semantics of the C programming language.

 No, it isn't, because the C code of H is not shown.

 *I DON'T KNOW WHY I MUST REPEAT THIS HUNDREDS OF TIMES*
The C code that <is> shown provides the template for the
infinite set of every D correctly simulated by H.

You need to repeat this because what you said is defective,
so it cannot be understood as you want and you don't know how
you could fix it so that you could say what you want to say.
--
Mikko