Re: 197 page execution trace of DDD correctly simulated by HHH

Am Sun, 30 Jun 2024 12:25:55 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/30/2024 3:42 AM, joes wrote:

Am Sat, 29 Jun 2024 15:03:02 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/29/2024 2:44 PM, joes wrote:

Am Fri, 28 Jun 2024 14:28:20 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/28/2024 2:18 PM, joes wrote:

Am Fri, 28 Jun 2024 12:53:46 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/28/2024 12:41 PM, joes wrote:

Thanks for leaving the unanswered questions in place, though I’d
rather have you answer them.

Why doesn’t the first recursive H return?

It should abort, just like the outer one.

The outer HHH meets its abort criteria one execution trace sooner than
the next inner one because HHH needs to see two complete execution
traces before its abort criteria has been met.

But it sees that the inner one would abort, so it can let it end normally.

As soon as the outer HHH sees the inner one complete one full execution
trace then the outer one has its abort criteria.

Same as the inner does, so the inner one does not in fact repeat.

No, I mean: why does the inner simulator repeat instead of aborting,
the same as the outer one does?

Repeat.

My point is: all recursive calls both enter and detect a
repeating state.

The inner ones always see one less execution trace than the next outer
one, thus could only meet their abort criteria after they have already
been aborted.

Why are they aborted?

--
Am Fri, 28 Jun 2024 16:52:17 -0500 schrieb olcott:
Objectively I am a genius.