Re: DDD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly halt

On 2024-07-11 13:38:56 +0000, olcott said:

On 7/11/2024 1:42 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-07-10 13:25:54 +0000, olcott said:
 

On 7/10/2024 2:02 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2024-07-09 23:49:16 +0000, olcott said:
 

_DDD()
[00002163] 55         push ebp      ; housekeeping
[00002164] 8bec       mov ebp,esp   ; housekeeping
[00002166] 6863210000 push 00002163 ; push DDD
[0000216b] e853f4ffff call 000015c3 ; call HHH(DDD)
 DDD correctly emulated by any pure function HHH that
correctly emulates 1 to ∞ steps of DDD can't make it
past the above line of code no matter what.
 [00002170] 83c404     add esp,+04
[00002173] 5d         pop ebp
[00002174] c3         ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002174]

 The subject line is misleading. There is only one DDD so "DDD correctly
emulated by HHH" should simply mean DDD and nothing else.

 *I added this to my latest paper*

 That doesn't fix the subject line.
 

 Then I don't understand what you are saying.

Perhaps you should ask someone who konws English better that you or I.

"DDD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly halt"
When halt means reaching its own final state and terminating normally.
 

Every time any HHH correctly emulates DDD it calls the
x86utm operating system to create a separate process
context with its own memory virtual registers and stack,
thus each recursively emulated DDD is a different instance.

 There should be a comma after the word "memory".
 

Yes.
 

Simulating Termination Analyzer H is Not Fooled by Pathological Input D
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/369971402_Simulating_Termination_Analyzer_H_is_Not_Fooled_by_Pathological_Input_D 

 There is another error on the first page. The first sentence says: "The
notion of a simulating termination analyzer is examined at the concrete
level of pairs of C functions". That is contracited in the fourth paragraph:
"To understand this analysis requires a sufficient knowledge of the C
programming language and what an x86 emulator does". The analysis is not at
the level of C functions if any knowledge about an x86 emulator is needed.

 That is a good idea. The less prerequisite knowledge my target
audience needs the more people will be able understand what I am
saying. I am trying to make my first page as simple as possible.
 To understand this analysis requires a sufficient knowledge
of the C programming language. An x86 emulator works just
like a C language interpreter except that it uses the compiled
machine language of a function instead of its source-code.

Perhapos you should say that an x86 emulator executes the compiled program
just like an x86 processor would but can in addition produce a trace of
the execution.

That HHH is built from an x86 emulator allows it to simulate
other C functions as if it was a C language interpreter.

The second page will have the more difficult prerequisites.

--
Mikko