Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 8/10/24 5:18 PM, olcott wrote:HHH is called by main() there is no directly executed DDD()On 8/10/2024 3:58 PM, Richard Damon wrote:Nope.On 8/10/24 4:36 PM, olcott wrote:>>>
As I have countlessly proven it only requires enough correctly
emulated steps to correctly infer that the input would never
reach is "return" instruction halt state.
Except that HHH does't do that, since if HHH decides to abort and return, then the DDD that it is emulating WILL return, just after HHH has stopped its emulation.
>
You just confuse the behavior of DDD with the PARTIAL emulation that HHH does, because you lie about your false "tautology".
>
>>>
Denying a tautology seems to make you a liar. I only
say "seems to" because I know that I am fallible.
Claiming a false statement is a tautology only make you a liar.
>
In this case, you lie is that the HHH that you are talking about do the "correct emulation" you base you claim on.
>
That is just a deception like the devil uses, has just a hint of truth, but the core is a lie.
>
What I say is provably correct on the basis of the
semantics of the x86 language.
The x86 language says DDD will Halt if HHH(DDD) returns a value.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.