Re: Analysis of Flibble’s Latest: Detecting vs. Simulating Infinite Recursion ZFC

Op 26.mei.2025 om 19:29 schreef olcott:

On 5/26/2025 12:25 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 26/05/2025 17:24, olcott wrote:

On 5/26/2025 11:10 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 26/05/2025 16:42, olcott wrote:

no
C function can see its own caller.

>
So because DDD calls HHH, HHH can't analyse the halting behaviour of DDD.
>
Got it.
>

>
I didn't say that.

>
Yes, you did.
>
On 24/5/2025 in Message-ID <100sr6o$ppn2$3@dont-email.me> you said:
>

You are a damned liar when you say that I said
that HHH must report on the behavior of its caller.
>
No HHH can report on the behavior of its caller
for the same reason that no function can report
on the value of the square-root of a dead cat.

>
Your words.
>
Since DDD is HHH's caller, according to you HHH can't report on DDD's behaviour.

>
HHH(DDD) does correctly report on the behavior that its
input specifies.
>
_DDD()
[00002192] 55             push ebp
[00002193] 8bec           mov ebp,esp
[00002195] 6892210000     push 00002192
[0000219a] e833f4ffff     call 000015d2  // call HHH
[0000219f] 83c404         add esp,+04
[000021a2] 5d             pop ebp
[000021a3] c3             ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [000021a3]
>
How many recursive emulations does HHH have to
wait before its emulated DDD magically halts
on its own without ever needing to be aborted?
>

HHH fails to correctly simulate the program specified in the input,