Re: V5 --- Professor Sipser --- Does Ben Bacarisse believe that Professor Sipser is wrong?

Op 26.aug.2024 om 21:51 schreef olcott:

On 8/26/2024 2:36 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 26.aug.2024 om 20:14 schreef olcott:

On 8/26/2024 2:23 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 25.aug.2024 om 22:27 schreef olcott:

  would have halted.

>
OK I got it now.
>
_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]
>
[Correctly emulated] is specified to mean emulated
according to the semantics of the x86 language.
>
Unlike Ben you do not understand that neither DDD
[correctly emulated] by HHH nor HHH called by this DDD
[correctly emulated] by HHH can possibly return to
their caller.

You remind me of somebody who tells the same joke every 15 minutes, because he is short of memory.
>
I said many times that HHH cannot possibly reach the end of its own simulation, which proves that the simulation cannot possibly be correct.

 Ridiculously stupidly directly disagreeing with the semantics
of the x86 language that define what correct simulation means.
 

Strong words without any evidence.
You ignore all the evidence that your simulation deviates from the semantics of the x86 language that define what correct simulation means. These semantics are not different in a direct execution, nor in the simulation by HHH1, which both show that according to these semantics, the program halts. So, your simulation deviates from the semantics by skipping the last few instructions of a halting program.
The real problem, however, is not the simulation, but the 'special condition' that HHH uses incorrectly, because its programmer is still dreaming of a HHH that will not see this 'special condition'. This programmer does not realize that by adding the code to recognize this 'special condition' and stop the simulation, the other HHH that does not see this 'special condition' disappeared and remains only in his dreams. HHH, when simulating *itself* should now decide about the DDD that uses this new HHH that sees this 'special condition' and aborts.
It is probable that you hide the code for the recognition of this 'special condition', because you know it is incorrect.
But that code is where the problem is, not the incomplete simulation itself.