Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 3/5/2025 3:27 AM, joes wrote:But only if HHH is actually just an emulator and not a decider.Am Tue, 04 Mar 2025 23:09:42 -0600 schrieb olcott:When DD emulated by HHH calls HHH(DD) (its own emulator)On 3/4/2025 11:07 PM, Richard Damon wrote:>On 3/4/25 11:48 PM, olcott wrote:On 3/4/2025 10:44 PM, Richard Damon wrote:On 3/4/25 7:34 PM, olcott wrote:On 3/4/2025 5:45 PM, Richard Damon wrote:On 3/4/25 11:11 AM, olcott wrote:On 3/4/2025 9:08 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:Op 04.mrt.2025 om 15:17 schreef olcott:On 3/4/2025 3:14 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:Op 04.mrt.2025 om 04:07 schreef olcott:
>lol "I will explain why this is your argument after you agree to it" smhI WILL NOT TOLERATE ANY OTHER ORDERWrong order,I will show that it is not straw-man after you quit dodging thatWHich is the strawman, that you are too stupid to recogines.It is not my stupidity it is your dishonestly using the straw-manWhich just show your stupidity, as DD doesn't HAVE its ownSo, my claim remains: HHH fails to reach the 'ret' instruction,DD calls its own emulator when emulated by HHH.
where the direct execution and some world-class simulators have
no problem to reach it.
DD DOES NOT call its own emulator when emulated by HHH1. DD DOES
NOT call its own emulator when directly executed.
emulator, and CAN'T know who or if it is being emulated.
deception to change the subject away from:
DD correctly emulated by HHH cannot possibly reach its own "ret"
instruction and terminate normally.
point.
>
it tells HHH to emulate itself again in recursive emulation
until aborted because DD is calling its own emulator.
When DD emulated by HHH1 calls HHH(DD) (not its own emulator)And what instruction in those two emulations was the first difference?
it tells HHH to emulate itself again yet not in recursive
emulation because DD is NOT calling its own emulator.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.