Re: HHH(DD) does correctly reject its input as non-halting --- VERIFIED FACT

Op 12.jun.2025 om 17:30 schreef olcott:
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. A simulation that is no problem for other world-class simulators.
What is the purpose to verify the fact of a failure? Another confirmation of the halting theorem?

 All of the above code is fully operational in this file
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c
 

Halt.c includes code to abort and halt the simulation.
HHH is not able to simulate this code correctly, because the criteria to abort are incorrect. It aborts the simulation even for some halting programs, including the simulation of itself.