Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 2024-06-07 13:49:09 +0000, olcott said:That you lack the mandatory prerequisite knowledge to understand
On 6/7/2024 12:49 AM, Mikko wrote:Still unproven whther P ever meets those criteria, in particularOn 2024-06-06 15:06:22 +0000, olcott said:><Professor Sipser agreed>>
If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D
until H correctly determines that its simulated D would never
stop running unless aborted then
>
H can abort its simulation of D and correctly report that D
specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</Professor Sipser agreed>
>
// Simplified Linz Ĥ (Linz:1990:319)
// Strachey(1965) CPL translated to C
void P(u32 x)
{
if (H(x, x))
HERE: goto HERE;
}
>
People here that are experts in the C programming language know that
*P correctly simulated by H cannot possibly stop running unless aborted*
yet lie about this or to try to get away with the strawman deception
CHANGE-THE-SUBJECT fake rebuttal.
People here who have recently followed these discussions know that "P
correctly simulated by H cannot possibly stop running unless aborted"
does not confirm or contradict anything Linz and Strachey have said.
When P correctly simulated by H meets this criteria
If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input P
until H correctly determines that its simulated P would never
stop running unless aborted then
the last "correctly".
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.