Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 9/2/2024 12:52 PM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:Which DDD does not.Op 02.sep.2024 om 18:38 schreef olcott:A halt decider is a Turing machine that computes the mapping from its
finite string input to the behavior that this finite string specifies.
If the finite string machine string machine description specifies that
it cannot possibly reach its own final halt state then this machine
description specifies non-halting behavior.
Then it is not total.A halt decider never ever computes the mapping for the computation
that itself is contained within.
Which makes this pathological input a counterexample.Unless there is a pathological relationship between the halt decider H
and its input D the direct execution of this input D will always have
identical behavior to D correctly simulated by simulating halt decider
H.
It is not simulating the abort because of a static variable. Why?It is emulating the exact same freaking machine code that the x86utmA correct emulation of DDD by HHH only requires that HHH emulate theIndeed, it should simulate *itself* and not a hypothetical other HHH
instructions of DDD** including when DDD calls HHH in recursive
emulation such that HHH emulates itself emulating DDD.
with different behaviour.
operating system is emulating.
Your HHH incorrectly changes behaviour.If HHH includes code to see a 'special condition' and aborts and halts,DDD has itself and the emulated HHH stuck in recursive emulation.
then it should also simulate the HHH that includes this same code and
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.