Re: DD specifies non-terminating behavior to HHH ---USPTO Incorporation by reference

On 2/21/25 5:40 PM, olcott wrote:

On 2/21/2025 3:21 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:

Op 21.feb.2025 om 01:25 schreef olcott:

On 2/20/2025 4:38 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:

On 2/20/2025 2:38 AM, Mikko wrote:

On 2025-02-20 00:31:33 +0000, olcott said:

>
[ .... ]
>

I have given everyone here all of the complete source code for a few
years

>

True but irrelevant. OP did not specify that HHH means that particular
code.

>
>

Every post that I have been talking about for two or
more years has referred to variations of that same code.

>
Yes.  It would be a relief if you could move on to posting something new
and fresh.
>

>
As soon as people fully address rather than endlessly dodge
my key points I will be done.
>
Let's start with a root point.
All of the other points validate this root point.
>
*Simulating termination analyzer HHH correctly determines*
*the non-halt status of DD*
>

It could be correct if this status was interpreted as the not-yet- halted status, because it aborts the simulation and in that way misses the halting behaviour of the input. HHH can only report wat it sees, not what it does not see.

 Unless the C function HHH aborts its simulation of the C
function DD this DD C function DOES NOT TERMINATE.
 

But since HHH does abort, DD ends.
Or, have you been lying now that Halt7.c is part of the logic of your system.
If not, then DD isn't a program and HHH doesn't exist, and everything you have said becomes a lie.