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

On 5/10/25 10:33 AM, olcott wrote:

On 5/10/2025 7:37 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:

Am 09.05.2025 um 04:22 schrieb olcott:
>

Look at their replies to this post.
Not a one of them will agree that
>
void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return; // final halt state
}
>
When 1 or more instructions of DDD are correctly
simulated by HHH then the correctly simulated DDD cannot
possibly reach its "return" instruction (final halt state).
>
They have consistently disagreed with this
simple point for three years.

>
I guess that not even a professor of theoretical computer
science would spend years working on so few lines of code.
>

 I created a whole x86utm operating system.
It correctly determines that the halting problem's
otherwise "impossible" input is actually non halting.

No it doen't

 int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}
 https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm
 

int main() {
   DD();
  }
shows that DD will halt.
I guess you think lies are valid logic, and that strawman requirements are valid changes.
Sorry, you are just proving your ustter stupidity.