Re: Every sufficiently competent C programmer knows --- Semantic Property of Finite String

On 3/13/25 10:05 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/13/2025 6:09 PM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 3/13/25 4:46 PM, olcott wrote:

On 3/13/2025 4:27 AM, joes wrote:

Am Wed, 12 Mar 2025 21:41:34 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 3/12/2025 7:56 PM, dbush wrote:

On 3/12/2025 8:41 PM, olcott wrote:

>
NOT WHEN IT IS STIPULATED THAT THE BEHAVIOR BEING MEASURED IS

>
The direct execution of DDD

>
is proven to be different than the behavior of DDD emulated by HHH
according to the semantics of the x86 language.

>
Which is weird, considering that a simulator should produce the same
behaviour.
>
>

DECIDERS ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT ON THE SEMANTIC OR SYNTACTIC PROPERTY OF
THEIR INPUT FINITE STRINGS.

And not if the input called a different simulator that didn't abort.
>

>
DDD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly
reach its own final state no matter what HHH
does.
>
DDD correctly emulated by HHH1 does reach its
own final state.

>
Which shows that HHH doesn't correctly emulate its input, unless you just lied and gave the two programs different inputs.
>

 void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
 Someone that is not a liar could explain exactly
how DDD emulated by HHH according to the semantics
of the C language must have the same behavior as
DDD emulated by HHH1 according to the semantics
of the C language.

WHy? The above is NOT a program, as to be a program it needs the full code of HHH included.
If the full code of HHH is included, and that HHH doesn't actually do a complete and correct emulation of its input, then it doesn't do that and we can't make it do that, without changing the program.

 Someone that is a liar will perpetually dodge
this challenge.
 

The fact you make the challage shows that you think lying is an acceptable form of argument, and that you are totally clueless as to how logic works.
You have admitted that all you work needs to be considered just a fraud and full of lies, because you have admitted that you are using incorrect definition for the meaning of core terms-of-art from the system you are talking about, somethng that even the most basic understanding of how logic works says is wrong.
Sorry, you have doomed your reputation by all your lies and deciet.