Re: Flat out dishonest or totally ignorant?

On 7/2/2024 9:48 AM, joes wrote:

Am Tue, 02 Jul 2024 07:23:50 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 7/2/2024 6:32 AM, joes wrote:

Am Mon, 01 Jul 2024 20:25:40 -0500 schrieb olcott:

 

Every C programmer that knows what an x86 emulator is knows that when
HHH emulates the machine language of Infinite_Loop,
Infinite_Recursion, and DDD that it must abort these emulations so
that itself can terminate normally.

At the cost of not doing the full simulation. If you want it to
terminate.

This <is> the problem that I am willing to discuss.

So why must a pure simulator terminate?
 

When this is construed as non-halting criteria then simulating
termination analyzer HHH is correct to reject these inputs as
non-halting by returning 0 to its caller.

It gets the decider part right, but not the simulator part.

 

Simulating termination analyzers must report on the behavior that
their finite string input specifies thus HHH must report that DDD
correctly emulated by HHH remains stuck in recursive simulation.

Which is not what DDD does, since the HHH that it calls detects a
recursive simulation and aborts it, returning and terminating.

Of course we want the right answer, which is not whatever HHH makes up,
but what the input DDD does by itself.

Do you understand the difference?
 

If you are going to continue lying about this I
am going to start ignoring everything that you say.
_DDD()
[00002172] 55               push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173] 8bec             mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175] 6872210000       push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a] e853f4ffff       call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
[0000217f] 83c404           add esp,+04
[00002182] 5d               pop ebp
[00002183] c3               ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
DDD is correctly emulated by HHH which calls an
emulated HHH(DDD) to repeat the process until aborted.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer