Re: Because Olcott has made this error 500 times in the last three years...

On 7/26/2024 8:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 26.jul.2024 om 15:22 schreef olcott:

On 7/26/2024 1:53 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 26.jul.2024 om 03:49 schreef olcott:

If you understand the x86 language and can't tell how DDD
emulated by HHH differs from DDD emulated by HHH1 by the
following then you are probably lying about understanding
the x86 language.

>
We understand it perfectly. HHH cannot possibly simulate itself correctly.

>
You are too stupid to know that a non-halting computation
cannot be emulated to completion because completion does
not exist.

 The non-halting behaviour is only in your dreams. It is irrelevant, because HHH halts when it aborts. Remember, HHH is simulating *itself*, a halting program, not another non-halting simulator that does not abort and does not halt.
 

typedef void (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);
void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
}
int main()
{
   DDD(DDD);
}
When we understand that HHH is accountable for the behavior of
its input and not accountable for the behavior of the computation
that itself is contained within then we understand that HHH(DDD)
is necessarily correct to reject DDD as non-halting.
--
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer