Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language

Liste des GroupesRevenir à c theory 
Sujet : Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language
De : polcott333 (at) *nospam* gmail.com (olcott)
Groupes : comp.theory
Date : 04. Jul 2024, 14:46:15
Autres entêtes
Organisation : A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID : <v665in$2oun1$7@dont-email.me>
References : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
User-Agent : Mozilla Thunderbird
On 7/4/2024 5:15 AM, joes wrote:
Am Wed, 03 Jul 2024 09:45:57 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 7/3/2024 9:39 AM, joes wrote:
Am Wed, 03 Jul 2024 08:21:40 -0500 schrieb olcott:
On 7/3/2024 3:26 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 02.jul.2024 om 21:48 schreef olcott:
On 7/2/2024 2:22 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:
Op 02.jul.2024 om 20:43 schreef olcott:
On 7/2/2024 1:59 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-07-01 12:44:57 +0000, olcott said:
On 7/1/2024 1:05 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2024-06-30 17:18:09 +0000, olcott said:
>
Richard just said that he affirms that when DDD correctly
simulated by HHH calls HHH(DDD) that this call returns even
though the semantics of the x86 language disagrees.
Which semantics?
I repeat.
 
DDD correctly emulated by HHH calls an emulated HHH(DDD) that emulates
DDD that calls an emulated HHH(DDD)
in a cycle that cannot end unless aborted.
But HHH aborts, so the cycle does end.
As long as it is impossible for DDD correctly emulated by HHH to reach
its own ret instruction then DDD never halts even when its stops running
because its emulation was aborted.
HHH halts by definition. Why can’t DDD?
 
By definition DDD calls it simulator.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

Date Sujet#  Auteur
29 Jun 24 * People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language129olcott
29 Jun 24 +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language23Richard Damon
29 Jun 24 i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language22olcott
29 Jun 24 i +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language20Richard Damon
29 Jun 24 i i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language19olcott
29 Jun 24 i i `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language18Richard Damon
29 Jun 24 i i  `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language17olcott
29 Jun 24 i i   `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language16Richard Damon
29 Jun 24 i i    `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language15olcott
29 Jun 24 i i     `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language14Richard Damon
29 Jun 24 i i      `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language13olcott
29 Jun 24 i i       `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language12Richard Damon
29 Jun 24 i i        `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language11olcott
29 Jun 24 i i         `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language10Richard Damon
30 Jun 24 i i          `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language9olcott
30 Jun 24 i i           `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language8Richard Damon
30 Jun 24 i i            `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language7olcott
30 Jun 24 i i             +- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Mikko
30 Jun 24 i i             `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language5Richard Damon
30 Jun 24 i i              `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language4olcott
30 Jun 24 i i               `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language3Richard Damon
30 Jun 24 i i                `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language2olcott
30 Jun 24 i i                 `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Richard Damon
30 Jun 24 i `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Mikko
30 Jun 24 +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language103Mikko
30 Jun 24 i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language102olcott
30 Jun 24 i +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language50Richard Damon
30 Jun 24 i i+* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language3olcott
30 Jun 24 i ii+- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Richard Damon
30 Jun 24 i ii`- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Richard Damon
30 Jun 24 i i+* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language42olcott
30 Jun 24 i ii`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language41Richard Damon
1 Jul 24 i ii `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language40olcott
1 Jul 24 i ii  `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language39Richard Damon
1 Jul 24 i ii   `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language38olcott
1 Jul 24 i ii    `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language37Richard Damon
1 Jul 24 i ii     `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language36olcott
1 Jul 24 i ii      `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language35Richard Damon
1 Jul 24 i ii       `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language34olcott
1 Jul 24 i ii        +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language30Richard Damon
1 Jul 24 i ii        i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language29olcott
1 Jul 24 i ii        i `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language28Richard Damon
1 Jul 24 i ii        i  `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language27olcott
1 Jul 24 i ii        i   `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language26Richard Damon
1 Jul 24 i ii        i    +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language21olcott
1 Jul 24 i ii        i    i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language20Richard Damon
1 Jul 24 i ii        i    i `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language19olcott
1 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  +* Re: olcott is still disagreeing with the semantics of simulation7joes
1 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i`* Re: olcott is still disagreeing with the semantics of simulation6olcott
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i `* Re: olcott is still disagreeing with the semantics of simulation5Richard Damon
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i  `* Re: olcott is still disagreeing with the semantics of simulation4olcott
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i   `* Re: olcott is still disagreeing with the semantics of simulation3Richard Damon
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i    `* Re: olcott is still disagreeing with the semantics of simulation2olcott
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i     `- Re: olcott is still disagreeing with the semantics of simulation1Richard Damon
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language4Richard Damon
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language3olcott
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i +- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Richard Damon
3 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1joes
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language6Richard Damon
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language5olcott
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language3Richard Damon
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language2olcott
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i i `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Richard Damon
3 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  i `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1joes
2 Jul 24 i ii        i    i  `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Mikko
1 Jul 24 i ii        i    `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language4olcott
1 Jul 24 i ii        i     `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language3Richard Damon
1 Jul 24 i ii        i      `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language2olcott
2 Jul 24 i ii        i       `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Richard Damon
4 Jul 24 i ii        `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language3joes
4 Jul 24 i ii         `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language2olcott
4 Jul 24 i ii          `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Richard Damon
1 Jul 24 i i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language --- repeat until acknowledged4olcott
1 Jul 24 i i `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language --- repeat until acknowledged3Richard Damon
1 Jul 24 i i  `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language --- repeat until acknowledged2olcott
1 Jul 24 i i   `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language --- repeat until acknowledged1Richard Damon
1 Jul 24 i +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language45Mikko
1 Jul 24 i i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language44olcott
1 Jul 24 i i +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language2joes
1 Jul 24 i i i`- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1olcott
2 Jul 24 i i +- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Richard Damon
2 Jul 24 i i `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language40Mikko
2 Jul 24 i i  `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language39olcott
2 Jul 24 i i   +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language34Fred. Zwarts
2 Jul 24 i i   i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language33olcott
3 Jul 24 i i   i `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language32Fred. Zwarts
3 Jul 24 i i   i  `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language31olcott
3 Jul 24 i i   i   +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language14joes
3 Jul 24 i i   i   i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language13olcott
4 Jul 24 i i   i   i `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language12joes
4 Jul 24 i i   i   i  `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language11olcott
4 Jul 24 i i   i   i   +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language9joes
4 Jul 24 i i   i   i   i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language8olcott
4 Jul 24 i i   i   i   i +* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language6joes
4 Jul 24 i i   i   i   i i`* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language5olcott
4 Jul 24 i i   i   i   i i `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language4joes
4 Jul 24 i i   i   i   i i  `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language3olcott
4 Jul 24 i i   i   i   i i   +- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1joes
4 Jul 24 i i   i   i   i i   `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Richard Damon
4 Jul 24 i i   i   i   i `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Richard Damon
4 Jul 24 i i   i   i   `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Richard Damon
3 Jul 24 i i   i   `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language16Fred. Zwarts
3 Jul 24 i i   +- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Richard Damon
3 Jul 24 i i   `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language3Mikko
1 Jul 24 i `* Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language6Fred. Zwarts
1 Jul 24 +- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1Fred. Zwarts
1 Jul 24 `- Re: People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language1olcott

Haut de la page

Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.

NewsPortal