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

Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:

On 12/05/2025 18:05, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

Ben Bacarisse <ben@bsb.me.uk> writes:
 

Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> writes:
>

On 12/05/2025 01:38, Mike Terry wrote:

>
<snip>
>

No single computation can be undecidable, considered on its own!  There
are only two possibilities: it halts or it doesn't.

>
Or both, it seems. You say it halts (and I would not hesitate to take you at
your word if the alternative is to dredge up a Windows system from
somewhere). Olcott says it is non-halting.

This is very odd.  You know it either halts or it does not halt so what
do you mean by "Or both, it seems."?

>
'Odd' is exactly the word.
>
Mr Olcott claims it never halts,

I don't think he does.  He claims that returning 0 is the correct
result, but that is all.

and Mike Terry claims that it halts almost immediately.
>
Perhaps we should send DDD to a robopsychiatrist.

No need.  It halts and PO claims that 0 (false) is the correct result
from some halting computations.  He's been quite clear about this in the
past.

--
Ben.