Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 8/7/2024 2:29 AM, Mikko wrote:On 2024-08-05 13:49:44 +0000, olcott said:
It doesn't change anything about DDD. HHH was supposed to decide anythingI know what it means. But the inflected form "emulated" does not meanIn other words when DDD is defined to have a pathological relationship
what you apparently think it means. You seem to think that "DDD
emulated by HHH" means whatever HHH thinks DDD means but it does not.
DDD means what it means whether HHH emulates it or not.
to HHH we can just close our eyes and ignore it and pretend that it
doesn't exist?
DDD does specify non-halting behavior to HHH and HHH must report on thisDDD halts.
non-halting behavior that DDD specifies.
No halt decider is ever allowed to report on the behavior of anyAha! The "unless" is new (you could've marked it.
computation that itself is contained within unless this is the same
behavior that its finite string input specifies.
It seems that no one here has that degree of expertise. That they knowCrackpots are usually too incompetent to recognise their own incompetence.
that they don't understand these things and still say that I am wrong is
dishonest.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.