Sujet : Re: Try and prove that DDD correctly emulated by HHH reaches its final halt state
De : rjh (at) *nospam* cpax.org.uk (Richard Heathfield)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 12. May 2025, 19:00:33
Autres entêtes
Organisation : Fix this later
Message-ID : <vvtd01$17c1i$2@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 12/05/2025 17:36, olcott wrote:
On 5/12/2025 11:29 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 12/05/2025 16:54, olcott wrote:
On 5/12/2025 9:41 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 12/05/2025 15:36, olcott wrote:
>
<snip>
>
It is nutty to require a simulating termination
analyzer to simulate a non-terminating input forever.
>
I have to agree with you here. In fact, you've put your finger on the precise reason that it's nutty to try to analyse a program's termination behaviour by simulating it.
>
>
Unless like every competent programmer
HHH can spot the repeating pattern of DDD
correctly emulated by HHH in N steps of
correct emulation.
>
You and I have very different ideas of 'correctness'. I get the idea that you're fairly proud of your Halt7/utmx86/whatever system. To me, it just looks like a bugfest,
Because you entirely ignore the gist of my whole
proof
You don't have a proof. You have bugs.
-- Richard HeathfieldEmail: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999Sig line 4 vacant - apply within
Try and prove that DDD correctly emulated by HHH reaches its final halt state
Re: Try and prove that DDD correctly emulated by HHH reaches its final halt state