Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 5/16/25 7:59 PM, olcott wrote:<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>On 5/16/2025 10:48 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:Nope, I have explained it, but it seems you are just to stupid to understand (and if you stop here you will just prove your stupidity)On 16/05/2025 16:10, olcott wrote:>
>
<snip>
>>>
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
>
Anyone that knows C can tell that when HHH does simulate
DDD correctly that it keeps getting deeper in recursive
simulation until aborted or OOM error.
Anyone who knows C knows that there isn't much HHH can do with the pointer value it's given. It can call DDD:
>
(*p)();
>
Sure when you make sure to totally ignore crucial
words in the specification of *HHH SIMULATES ITS INPUT*
then by using the strawman error on these dishonestly
changed words they are easy to rebut.
>
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man
>
On the other hand when honest C programmers see
those words they will think of something like a C
interpreter written in C is doing the simulation.
>
Yes, H uses its partial simulation to make the decision, and that can be from the partial simulation.
But the criteria about being non-halting is based at looking at the hypothetical correct simulation of this exact input (that is the meaninf of its simulated input would not halt) and if that simulation will ever reach a final state, which it does.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.