Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 4/3/2025 1:32 AM, Mikko wrote:Not a description of a program, so not a valid input, as it doesn't include the definition of HHH.On 2025-04-03 02:08:22 +0000, olcott said:_DDD()
>>It is a truism that a correct x86 emulator
would emulate itself emulating DDD whenever
DDD calls this emulator with itself.
Which does not agree or disagree with my comment nor say anything about it,
and it doesn't clarify any aspect of your statement that i commented.
If there is any indirect connection to anything relevant that connection is
not presented, leaving your response unconnected and therefore irrelevant.
>
So you did not reply to the immediated context.
>
[00002172] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping
[00002173] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping
[00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD
[0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)
[0000217f] 83c404 add esp,+04
[00002182] 5d pop ebp
[00002183] c3 ret
Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]
THE FACT THAT DDD EMULATED BY HHH DOES NOT HALT ISBut HHH can't correctly emulate the above, since it doesn't have defined behavior, as the HHH that it calls isn't included.
NOT RELEVANT TO A CORRECT DECISION BY A HALT DECIDER?
HHH does correctly compute the mapping from its input
finite string on this basis:
Simulating termination analyzer PrincipleBut, when we include all of the code for DDD, we see that DDD doesn't prevent its own termination, as the HHH that is part of it will abort its emulation and return to it.
It is always correct for any simulating termination
analyzer to stop simulating and reject any input that
would otherwise prevent its own termination. The
only rebuttal to this is rejecting the notion that
deciders must always halt.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.