Re: Every sufficiently competent C programmer knows --- Paraphrase of Sipser's agreement

On 3/16/2025 11:44 AM, dbush wrote:

On 3/16/2025 12:42 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/16/2025 10:32 AM, dbush wrote:

On 3/16/2025 11:05 AM, olcott wrote:

On 3/16/2025 7:31 AM, joes wrote:

Am Sat, 15 Mar 2025 16:27:00 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 3/15/2025 5:12 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-03-14 14:39:30 +0000, olcott said:

On 3/14/2025 4:03 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-03-13 20:56:22 +0000, olcott said:

On 3/13/2025 4:22 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-03-13 00:36:04 +0000, olcott said:
>
>

void DDD()
{
    HHH(DDD);
    return;
}
int DD()
{
    int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
    if (Halt_Status)
      HERE: goto HERE;
    return Halt_Status;
}
>
When HHH correctly emulates N steps of the above functions none of
them can possibly reach their own "return" instruction and
terminate normally.

>
Nevertheless, assuming HHH is a decider, Infinite_Loop and
Infinite_Recursion specify a non-terminating behaviour, DDD
specifies a terminating behaviour

>
What is the sequence of machine language instructions of DDD
emulated by HHH such that DDD reaches its machine address 00002183?

>
Irrelevant off-topic distraction.

>
Proving that you don't have a clue that Rice's Theorem is anchored in
the behavior that its finite string input specifies.

>
Another irrelevant off-topic distraction, this time involving a false
claim.
One can be a competent C programmer without knowing anyting about
Rice's Theorem.

YES.
>

Rice's Theorem is about semantic properties in general, not just
behaviours.
The unsolvability of the halting problem is just a special case.
>

Does THE INPUT TO simulating termination analyzer HHH encode a C
function that reaches its "return"
instruction [WHEN SIMULATED BY HHH] (The definition of simulating
termination analyzer) ???

>

That can't be right. Otherwise my simulator could just not simulate
at all and say that no input halts.
>

>
Originally a "decider" was any TM that always stops
running for any reason.
>
In computability theory, a decider is a Turing
machine that halts for every input.[1]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decider_(Turing_machine)
>

<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
</MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>

key word "correctly"
>

>
*I anchored what correct emulation means now*
>
<Accurate Paraphrase>
If emulating termination analyzer H emulates its input
finite string D of x86 machine language instructions
according to the semantics of the x86 programming language
until H correctly determines that this emulated D cannot
possibly reach its own "ret" instruction in any finite
number of correctly emulated steps then
>
H can abort its emulation of input D and correctly report
that D specifies a non-halting sequence of configurations.
</Accurate Paraphrase>
>
>

>
>
Nope:
>

I have new words you freaking moron Ben never saw these new words.
>

 And Sipser didn't agree to the paraphrase so it's just you giving your opinion.

He has not yet agreed.
The key point here is whether or not this
would indicate that he agrees that this
alternate criteria is correct.
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer