Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 9/5/2024 12:22 PM, joes wrote:WHich only happens *IF* HHH has been defined to never abort.Am Thu, 05 Sep 2024 12:17:01 -0500 schrieb olcott:When HHH is waiting for the next HHHOn 9/5/2024 11:56 AM, joes wrote:>Am Thu, 05 Sep 2024 11:52:04 -0500 schrieb olcott:On 9/5/2024 11:34 AM, joes wrote:Am Thu, 05 Sep 2024 11:10:40 -0500 schrieb olcott:On 9/5/2024 10:57 AM, joes wrote:>Am Thu, 05 Sep 2024 08:24:20 -0500 schrieb olcott:On 9/5/2024 2:34 AM, Mikko wrote:On 2024-09-03 13:00:50 +0000, olcott said:On 9/3/2024 5:25 AM, Mikko wrote:On 2024-09-02 16:38:03 +0000, olcott said:I don’t know, you claim it’s a decider!How the F--- Does the emulated HHH return?Show the details of how DDD emulated by HHH reaches its ownBy HHH returning, which we are guaranteed from its definition as a
machine address 0000217f.
decider.But why does HHH halt and return that itself doesn’t halt?The first HHH cannot wait for its HHH to abort which is waiting for itsDDD emulated by HHH CANNOT POSSIBLY reach its own machine addressOnly HHH can’t simulate it.
0000217f.
>The directly executed HHH correctly determines that its emulated DDDWhy doesn’t the simulated HHH abort?
must be aborted because DDD keeps *THE EMULATED HHH* stuck in
recursive emulation.
HHH to abort on and on with no HHH ever aborting.
>
which is waiting for the next HHH
which is waiting for the next HHH...
we have an infinite chain of waiting and never aborting.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.