Sujet : Re: Liar detector: Peter Olcott
De : richard (at) *nospam* damon-family.org (Richard Damon)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 16. Jul 2024, 04:16:59
Autres entêtes
Organisation : i2pn2 (i2pn.org)
Message-ID : <62ab42ade325b1815f63e1ac3b39a1ec333f541d@i2pn2.org>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 7/15/24 8:59 AM, olcott wrote:
On 7/15/2024 2:19 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-07-14 14:26:21 +0000, olcott said:
>
>
When I refer to the x86 language I am referring to the minimal
subset that runs the same way on compatible Intel 32-bit processors.
>
Then you should specify a specific instruction set, preferably the one
that your compiler uses.
>
All this is a moot deflation away from the point.
You can see the actual code you can look up what
its instructions mean.
_DDD()
[00002163] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping
[00002164] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping
[00002166] 6863210000 push 00002163 ; push DDD
[0000216b] e853f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DDD)
[00002170] 83c404 add esp,+04
[00002173] 5d pop ebp
[00002174] c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002174]
Right, and call HHH means go into HHH and see what it actually does and report that answer.
First, that means that the code of HHH must be part of the input.
Second, the "correct emulation" of that code must agree with what HHH(DDD) actually does.
If HHH(DDD) returns to main, then the ONLY result a correct emulation of that instuction can result in is seeing HHH return to DDD at instruction 0000216b.
…