Re: DD correctly emulated by HHH --- Kicking the straw-man deception out on its ass

Op 02.mrt.2025 om 23:28 schreef olcott:

On 3/2/2025 4:15 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 02.mrt.2025 om 22:21 schreef olcott:

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.
>
This process computes the mapping from the actual input
(not any other damn thing) finite string to the non
terminating behavior that this finite specifies when
it calls its own emulator in recursive emulation.

>
In other words 'non terminating behavior' means that *HHH* was unable to reach the 'ret' instruction.

 Not at all. The fact that DD calls its own emulator
makes DD unable to reach its own "ret" instruction.
 

Counter factual. The exact same finite string in direct execution or simulated by HHH1 shows that DD is perfectly able to reach its 'ret' instruction of the exact same input, because *HHH* cannot simulate itself.
It is *HHH* that fails to reach this 'ret' instruction.