Re: Incorrect requirements --- Computing the mapping from the input to HHH(DD)

olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> writes:
[...]

DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly
reach its own "return" instruction.
>
DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly
reach its own "return" instruction.
>
DDD correctly simulated by HHH cannot possibly
reach its own "return" instruction.

I would like to propose an experiment.  It would require cooperation
by most of the regular posters here, and I'm not optimistic that
that will be forthcoming, but it's worth a try.

olcott frequently posts the same statement multiple times, presumably
as a form of emphasis.  In this case, he's only posted the statement
three times, and without gratuitous all-caps, but I've seen worse.

I propose that whenever olcott makes a repetitive post, everyone
ignores it.  The goal is to break him of this annoying habit.
Directly asking him to stop is unlikely to work, but depriving him
of attention just might.

This will be the last time I reply to such a post.  Does anyone else
want to join the experiment?  Richard Damon replies to olcott's
posts more than anyone else does, so this won't work without his
cooperation.

--
Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com
void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */