Re: Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?

On 3/24/2024 3:51 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 24.mrt.2024 om 05:55 schreef olcott:

Can an abort decider be defined that cannot be fooled by any pathological input?
>
01 int D(ptr x)  // ptr is pointer to int function
02 {
03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04   if (Halt_Status)
05     HERE: goto HERE;
06   return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 void main()
10 {
11   H(D,D);
12 }
>
Of all of the elements of the set of H(D,D) where H simulates its
input there are matched pairs of otherwise identical elements that
only differ by whether they abort their simulation or not.
>
The half of these that don't abort are incorrect because all deciders
must halt. This makes the other half correct about the abort/no abort
decision.

 No. The other, aborting, half is just wrong, because it aborts when it is not needed. So, the half that aborts is wrong and it may be argued that it is better to not abort something that halts on its own and that

At least two software engineers with masters degrees in computer science
disagree. Exactly what are you software engineering skills? I have been
a professional C++ software engineer since Y2K.

therefore not responding is better than responding with a wrong answer. So, both halves are wrong, but the half that aborts is more wrong. It gives the wrong answer. The other half is also wrong, but it does not give a wrong answer, but does not respond.
 

>
I don't think an abort decider can be fooled by a pathological input.
>

I am very sorry to hear that.
 

--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer