Re: D simulated by H never halts no matter what H does V3

On 5/5/24 10:51 AM, olcott wrote:

On 5/5/2024 3:33 AM, Ben Bacarisse wrote:

Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de> writes:
>

[ Followup-To: set ]
>
In comp.theory olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:

...

You are doing better than Alan on this though he doesn't
have a single clue about what execution traces are or how
they work.

>
You should read "How to make friends and influence people" by Dale
Carnegie.  You may not care about the former, but you sure are trying the
latter.  Hint: telling nasty lies about people is not effective.

>
With respect (and I mean that), you've misread the situation.  PO is
very effective at influencing people to do what he wants.  Getting
clever, knowledgeable people to talk to him about his "work" is how
he maintains his sense of self.  It's his narcissistic fuel.
>

 When people say that a particular precise example of software
engineering is incorrect when they don't even know what execution
traces are that meets the reckless disregard for the truth of
defamation.

 If my estimate that the don't know execution traces is incorrect
they do know them yet say I was wrong on the basis of not even
looking at what I said that is an ever more clear-cut case of
reckless disregard for the truth.

As is your reckless disregard for the evidence that you are wrong.

 Can D correctly simulated by H terminate normally?
00 int H(ptr x, ptr x)  // ptr is pointer to int function
01 int D(ptr x)
02 {
03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04   if (Halt_Status)
05     HERE: goto HERE;
06   return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 int main()
10 {
11   H(D,D);
12 }
 Execution Trace
Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
 keeps repeating (unless aborted)
Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)

Unless of course, some H aborts its simulation, which it does.

 Simulation invariant:
D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.

PROVEM incorrect, and your repeating the claim after this has been pointed out, and you have made NO attempt to refute just shows that you are nothing but a pathological liar that doesn't care about what is actually true.

 

And to this end, telling nasty lies about people is very effective.  One
of the hardest thing to ignore is a public post saying you are stupid or
ignorant or a liar.
>

 There are not a whole lot of different reasons why anyone would
say that the above execution trace is incorrect yet all of them
meet the reckless disregard for the truth of defamation.
 

Nope, your claim does.
You are just proving that you don't care if you are shown to be nothing but a liar.
So, it will be continually pointed out until you correct your behavior,