Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 3/2/25 9:22 PM, olcott wrote:The call to HHH(DD) from the directly executed DD returnsOn 3/2/2025 6:42 PM, Richard Damon wrote:And you keep on making the claim without evidence!!!!On 3/2/25 4:49 PM, olcott wrote:>On 3/2/2025 3:29 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 3/2/25 4:21 PM, olcott wrote:>int DD()>
{
int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return Halt_Status;
}
>
_DD()
[00002133] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping
[00002134] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping
[00002136] 51 push ecx ; make space for local
[00002137] 6833210000 push 00002133 ; push DD
[0000213c] e882f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DD)
[00002141] 83c404 add esp,+04
[00002144] 8945fc mov [ebp-04],eax
[00002147] 837dfc00 cmp dword [ebp-04],+00
[0000214b] 7402 jz 0000214f
[0000214d] ebfe jmp 0000214d
[0000214f] 8b45fc mov eax,[ebp-04]
[00002152] 8be5 mov esp,ebp
[00002154] 5d pop ebp
[00002155] c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0035) [00002155]
>
DD emulated by HHH according to the behavior that DD
specifies cannot possibly reach its own "ret" instruction
and terminate normally.
WHich only shows that HHH can not correctly emulate its input and give an answer.
>
The fact that HHH does correctly determine that DD
emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own "ret"
instruction and terminate normally proves that your
claim is counter factual.
You say that, but it isn't true,
You keep trying to get away with saying that the
fact that DD calls its own emulator in recursive
emulation does not change the behavior from the
behavior of the directly executed DD.
>
AT THIS POINT THAT BECOMES VERY STUPIDLY WRONG.
SINCE WE KNOW THAT YOU ARE NOT THAT STUPID WHAT ELSE IS LEFT?
>
>
What instruction acted differently between the to, that was directly executied and correctly emulated to different results.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.