Re: A state transition diagram proves ... GOOD PROGRESS

On 10/19/24 7:28 AM, olcott wrote:

On 10/19/2024 6:21 AM, Richard Damon wrote:

On 10/19/24 6:53 AM, olcott wrote:

On 10/19/2024 2:22 AM, joes wrote:

Am Fri, 18 Oct 2024 16:46:03 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 10/18/2024 4:24 PM, joes wrote:

Am Fri, 18 Oct 2024 15:18:46 -0500 schrieb olcott:

On 10/18/2024 2:51 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:

On 10/18/2024 2:10 PM, joes wrote:

>

The existence of the check has an effect right from the start;
besides, it is true the first time it is executed.

So maybe you have ADD too. You can't seem to pay attention when
things are explained to you many different times several different
ways.

What you call "explaining" is in actual fact the assertion of
falsehoods.  This is usually called lying.
The variable Root does indeed affect your program.

*I never say that it didn't*

You said nothing at all. Productive communication would have included
an agreement and clarification.
>

The "root" variable has NO EFFECT WHAT-SO-EVER on the correctness or
completeness of HHH emulating itself emulating DDD until this DDD
calls HHH(DDD).

DDD does nothing else but call HHH, and Root is part of HHH, so is
simulated the first time around.

It is possible that I am not communicating this clearly enough
The root variable cannot possibly have have any effect what-so-ever on
the correctness of HHH emulating DDD or HHH emulating itself emulating
DDD until the root variable tests true.

>

It has the effect of not aborting the simulation.

>
It has this effect only after every competent software
engineer can independently verify that it is correct:
>
Emulating termination analyzer HHH emulates its input DDD
according to the semantics of the x86 language (including HHH
emulating itself emulating DDD) until HHH correctly determines
that its emulated DDD would never stop running unless aborted.

>
Except that the correct determination doesn't happen in the case that Root doesn't affect the behavior of the emulated DDD, so that impurity does have affect.

 The root variable has no effect what-so-ever on
the correctness of the emulation up to the point
where everyone can see that HHH is correct to reject DDD.
 

But of course it does, be cause it is shown TESTING it in your long trace.
If it has no affect, why do you have it in there at all?
Try setting root to 0 in your program and see that it makes the outer HHH change behavior.
You are just proving yourself to be a liar.
It might not change the behavior of the emulation, but it does change the behavior of the "program" that HHH is emulating.
Sorry, but you are just proving your utter ignorance of what you are talking about.