Liste des Groupes | Revenir à theory |
On 7/7/2025 3:37 AM, Mikko wrote:People who can parrot textbooks know better than people who cannot.On 2025-07-07 03:12:30 +0000, olcott said:To people that never had any actual understanding and
On 7/6/2025 9:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:Unless you can quote some respectable author your prohibitions areOn 7/6/25 4:06 PM, olcott wrote:No decider is ever allowed to report on anythingOn 7/6/2025 12:00 PM, Richard Damon wrote:It seems you don't understand those words.On 7/6/25 11:19 AM, olcott wrote:You insistence that a non-terminating input be simulatedvoid DDD()No, it just isn't smart enough to detect that you lied in your premise.
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
*EVERY BOT FIGURES THIS OUT ON ITS OWN*
There is no way that DDD simulated by HHH (accordingAnd there is no way for HHH to correctly simulate its input and return an answer
to the semantics of the C programming language)
can possibly reach its own "return" statement final
halt state.
until non-existent completion is especially nuts because
you have been told about this dozens of times.
What the F is wrong with you?
I don't say that the decider needs to simulate the input to completion, but that it needs to be able to actually PROVE that if this exact input WAS given to a correct simultor (which won't be itself, since it isn't doing the complete simulation) will run for an unbounded number of steps.
besides the actual behavior that its input actually
specifies.
meaningless.
can only parrot textbooks. They need to see this things
in other textbooks.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.