Re: Incorrect requirements --- Computing the mapping from the input to HHH(DD)

On 09/05/2025 21:15, olcott wrote:

On 5/9/2025 3:07 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:

On 09/05/2025 20:46, olcott wrote:

We have not begun to get into any of those points.
We are only asking can DDD correctly simulated
by any HHH that can exist ever reach its own
"return" instruction.

>
DDD can't be correctly simulated by itself (which is effectively what you're trying to do when you fire up the simulation from inside DDD).
>

 How the Hell did you twist my words to say that?

I haven't touched your words. What I have done is to observe that DDD's /only/ action is to call a simulator. Since DDD isn't itself a simulator, there is nothing to simulate except a call to a simulator.
It's recursion without a base case - a rookie error.
HHH cannot successfully complete its task, because it never regains control after the first recursion. To return, it must abort the simulation, which means the simulation fails.

 void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
 When 1 or more statements of DDD are correctly
simulated by HHH then this correctly simulated
DDD cannot possibly reach its own “return statement”.

On what grounds can you persuade an extraordinarily sceptical readership that HHH 'correctly simulated' DDD?
There are only two possibilities:
(a) HHH aborts the simulation prematurely, or
(b) it doesn't.
If (a), the simulation fails to 'play' DDD correctly.
If (b), the simulation fails to arrive at a decision.
--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within