Re: Everyone makes sure to avoid addressing this exact point

On 2025-03-11 22:15:57 +0000, olcott said:

typedef void (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);
 void Infinite_Loop()
{
   HERE: goto HERE;
   return;
}
 void Infinite_Recursion()
{
   Infinite_Recursion();
   return;
}
 void DDD()
{
   HHH(DDD);
   return;
}
 int DD()
{
   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
   if (Halt_Status)
     HERE: goto HERE;
   return Halt_Status;
}
 When HHH correctly emulates N steps of the above
functions none of them can possibly reach their own
"return" instruction and terminate normally.

Yet another false claim. That exact point has been addressed many times.
But why it should be and has been addressed? It is not interesting per
se and has not been shown to have any connections that could make it
interesting.
--
Mikko