Re: DDD emulated by HHH --- (does not refer to prior posts)

On 2024-08-29 14:07:39 +0000, olcott said:

On 8/29/2024 2:17 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-08-28 12:08:06 +0000, olcott said:
 

On 8/28/2024 2:39 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-08-27 12:44:31 +0000, olcott said:
 

On 8/27/2024 3:38 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 27.aug.2024 om 04:33 schreef olcott:

This is intended to be a stand-alone post that does not
reference anything else mentioned in any other posts.
 void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
 _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]
 When we assume that:
(a) HHH is an x86 emulator that is in the same memory space as DDD.
(b) HHH emulates DDD according to the semantics of the x86 language.
 then we can see that DDD emulated by HHH cannot possibly get past
its own machine address 0000217a.
 

  Yes, we see. In fact DDD is not needed at all.

 A straw man fallacy (sometimes written as strawman) is the informal fallacy of refuting an argument different from the one actually under discussion...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

 You should also point a link to the equivocation fallacy. You use it
more often than straw man.

 Isomorphism is not equivocation

 The use of HHH for many purposes (a specific program, an unpsecified
memeber of a set of programs, a hypothetical program) is.
 Your first posting looked like you were going to apply equivocation
later in the discussion. Now, after several later messages, it seems
that you want to apply the fallacy of "moving the goal posts" instead.
 

 void EEE()
{
   HERE: goto HERE;
   return;
}
 HHH correctly predicts what the behavior of EEE would
be if this HHH never aborted its emulation of EEE.
 void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
 HHH correctly predicts what the behavior of DDD would
be if this HHH never aborted its emulation of DDD.

That's OK. Just be clear that HHH is not a halt decider.
Note that DDD does not care what HHH returns if it returns,
only whether it returns at all.
--
Mikko