Sujet : Re: How could HHH report on the behavior of its caller?
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theoryDate : 16. May 2025, 16:13:21
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <1007kmh$3qb7l$10@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 5/16/2025 8:54 AM, Richard Damon wrote:
On 5/15/25 10:53 PM, olcott wrote:
On 5/15/2025 2:37 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-05-15 01:30:08 +0000, olcott said:
>
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
>
int main()
{
DDD();
}
>
If HHH cannot report on the behavior of its caller
because this is a ridiculous requirement then how
can HHH report on the direct execution of DDD()
(AKA its caller).
>
Your HHH can use all information that Flibble's decider can. Flibble's
decider can determine and report that DDD halts.
>
>
I asked you (not Flibble) to show exactly how the requirement
that HHH report on the direct execution of DDD()
[that requires HHH to report on the behavior of its caller]
is not nonsense.
>
I presume that you dodge because you already know that
it is nonsense yet want to remain disagreeable anyway.
>
How can it be nonsense?
int main()
{
DDD(); // Can HHH report on the behavior of its caller?
}
<divergence from the question snipped>
-- Copyright 2025 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Geniushits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer
…