Re: Why do people here insist on denying these verified facts?

On 6/26/24 8:45 AM, olcott wrote:

On 6/26/2024 2:46 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-06-25 21:24:34 +0000, olcott said:
>

On 6/25/2024 3:41 PM, joes wrote:

Am Sat, 22 Jun 2024 11:18:07 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/22/2024 11:03 AM, joes wrote:

Am Sat, 22 Jun 2024 10:16:18 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 6/22/2024 9:42 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 6/22/24 10:31 AM, olcott wrote:

>

The input to HHH0(DDD) includes itself.
The input to HHH1(DDD) DOES NOT include itself.

Yes, both include HHH0. The second case is boring.

Suppose DDD1 only called HHH1. How would HHH1 simulate it?
>

The fact that DDD calls HHH0(DDD) and does not call HHH1(DDD) changes
the behavior of DDD correctly emulated by HHH0 relative to DDD correctly
emulated by HHH1.

DDD does not change behaviour depending on its simulator, that is an
error on the part of the simulator.
>

>
No dumbo that is not it.
The input that calls its own simulator defines different
behavior than when it is simulated by a different simulator.

>
The only correct interpretation of the input is the interpretation
specified by the problem statement.

 In other words you believe that the you have the power to
overrule the semantics of the x86 language.
 

Which says that execution, and thus correct emulation continue to a final state is reached.

That is a ridiculously stupid thing to say.

Yes, that an aborted emulation is "correct" (vs incomplete) is just a rediculously stupid thing to say.

 

If your program interpretes it
differently then its interpretation is wrong.
>

 If that was not a flat out lie then you could show
the detailed steps of how this is false.

That would be something you would say.
So, if your emulation doesn't exactly match the behavior defined by the code being emulated, that ISN'T an "incorrect results".
You are just proving that your logic is based on the right to assert lies.

 Exactly how does an x86 emulator at machine address 000015d2
emulate DDD such that the call from DDD to H0(DDD) returns?
 

If the emulator begins with:
int H0(ptr addr) {
   static int flag = 0;
   if (flag) return 0;
   flag = 1;
...
Then it can. Nothing you have said in these posts contradict that behavior..

_DDD()
[00002172] 55               push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002173] 8bec             mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002175] 6872210000       push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a] e853f4ffff       call 000015d2 ; call H0(DDD)
[0000217f] 83c404           add esp,+04
[00002182] 5d               pop ebp
[00002183] c3               ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
 So far no one has ever provided these details because
they know that they are lying.

No, we have, you just refuse to see because it shows how ignorant you are of what you talk about.