Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
Am Wed, 26 Jun 2024 15:10:36 -0500 schrieb olcott:On 6/26/2024 2:43 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:That's not how it works. You should try to rephrase if you are notYour posts are, in the main, tedious in the extreme. When you repeatI must keep repeating them until they bother to pay attention to the
the same thing 30 times over, you can't expect anybody to read each of
the repetitions as though it were fresh and new.
exact words that I am exactly saying because every fake rebuttal is the
strawman deception.
understood.
A strawman is a misrepresentation. I think we understand you correctly,
if at all.
This made me laugh hysterically.All the people you are debating with care about the truth. That's whyIt seems to me that they are only here to play the troll.
they're in this group debating with you.
Then why do you think that emulator can abort or otherwise change theAnything "like" what an x86 emulator does is insufficiently precise.An x86 emulator is already 100% perfectly precise if the trolls that
review my work don't think so then that proves that they are trolls.
behaviour of its input?
And the "semantics of x86" don't specify anthing beyond the meaning of*That is a stupid thing to say*
x86 programs in general.
The semantics of the x86 language provides 100% of all of the details of
the behavior of these two functions.
There is nothing that makes this specific to x86. (Also C is not asm.)Yes stupid this makes it 100% specific to the x86 language.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.