Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 6/13/2025 4:26 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:Counter factual, There are only two recursions.Op 12.jun.2025 om 17:30 schreef olcott:The code of the input to HHH(DD) specifies
>
Even after many corrections, Olcott repeated his claims without learning anything from his previous errors.
Lack of knowledge does not make someone look stupid, but the resistance against learning does.
>int DD()>
{
int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return Halt_Status;
}
>
It is a verified fact that DD() *is* one of the forms
of the counter-example input as such an input would
be encoded in C. Christopher Strachey wrote his in CPL.
>
// rec routine P
// §L :if T[P] go to L
// Return §
// https://academic.oup.com/comjnl/article/7/4/313/354243
void Strachey_P()
{
L: if (HHH(Strachey_P)) goto L;
return;
}
>
https://academic.oup.com/comjnl/article-abstract/7/4/313/354243? redirectedFrom=fulltext
>
It *is* a verified fact DD correctly simulated by HHH
cannot possibly reach its own "return" statement
final halt state.
Showing the failure of HHH to reach the end of the simulation.
HHH simulates DD that calls HHH(DD)
HHH simulates DD that calls HHH(DD)
HHH simulates DD that calls HHH(DD)...
That you can't understand this is merely a lackNo, *you* fail to show how HHH reaches the correct end of the simulation. We see that HHH fails to reach the end of a correct simulation.
of sufficient tecnh9cal competence on your part.
That you continue to fail to show all of the details
of exactly how DD does reach its simulated "return"
statement final halt state proves that you know you
are not competent.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.