Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 2025-05-22 22:35:51 +0000, olcott said:I am paraphrasing.
On 5/22/2025 3:18 AM, Mikko wrote:A straw man fallcy is a lie, so you are lying.On 2025-05-21 15:33:23 +0000, olcott said:>
>On 5/21/2025 3:12 AM, Mikko wrote:>On 2025-05-20 14:37:40 +0000, olcott said:>
>On 5/20/2025 2:06 AM, Mikko wrote:>On 2025-05-20 04:20:54 +0000, olcott said:>
><MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>>
If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its
input D until H correctly determines that its simulated D
would never stop running unless aborted then
>
Do you understand that we are only evaluating whether
or not HHH/DDD meets this above criteria?
I do understand that the meaning of the behaviour is not mentioned
in the creteria and is therefore irrelevant, an obvious consequence
of which is that your "WRONG!" above is false.
*H correctly simulates its input D until*
specifies that HHH must simulate DDD according
to the meaning of the rules of the x86 language.
The words Sipser agreed to do not refer to that specification, and
is irrelevant to the fact that the meaning of the behaviour, if
there is any, isn't referred there, either.
Sure they do. There is only a single measure of
*H correctly simulates its input D*
When the language of D is the x86 language.
No, they do not. Sipser said nothing about any specific language. That
you may apply his words to a specific language does not mean that
Sipser referred to that language.
*If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its input D*
What is the criterion measure of a correct simulation?
>
_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]
>
The damned liars here are trying to get away with
a correct simulation of DDD interprets: "push ebp"
to mean "jmp 000021a3"
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.