Re: Proving the: Simulating termination analyzer Principle

On 06/04/2025 00:18, olcott wrote:

On 4/5/2025 5:18 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 05/04/2025 22:31, dbush wrote:

<snip>

>
Changing the input is not allowed.

>
You're right, but it doesn't matter very much as long as terminates() *always* gets the answer right for any arbitrary program tape and any data tape. Mr Olcott's fails to do that.
>

 Termination analyzers are not required to be infallible.

Then why all the fuss? Writing a program that doesn't have to work is not exactly difficult.
int terminates(void (*prg)(), void *data)
{
   return 1; /* job done */
}
"Termination analyzers are not required to be infallible." - Peter Olcott
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within