Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
Op 02.jul.2024 om 14:22 schreef olcott:If you disagree with this you are either dishonestOn 7/2/2024 3:22 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:Repeating the same thing that has already been proved to be irrelevant does not bring the discussion any further.Op 02.jul.2024 om 03:25 schreef olcott:>typedef void (*ptr)();>
int HHH(ptr P);
>
void Infinite_Loop()
{
HERE: goto HERE;
}
>
void Infinite_Recursion()
{
Infinite_Recursion();
}
>
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
}
>
int main()
{
HHH(Infinite_Loop);
HHH(Infinite_Recursion);
HHH(DDD);
}
>
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.
Whether or not it *must* abort is not very relevant.
This <is> the problem that I am willing to discuss.
I am unwilling to discuss any other problem.
This does meet the Sipser approved criteria.
>
<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
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.
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
Sipser is not relevant, because that is about a correct simulation. Your simulation is not correct.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.