Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 5/9/2025 6:25 AM, Richard Damon wrote:No, I am giving you the opertunity to correct the errors in your statements.On 5/8/25 6:20 PM, olcott wrote:You try to get away with changing the subject from this:On 5/8/2025 5:13 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:>On 08/05/2025 22:41, olcott wrote:>What my code actually does is totally irrelevant.>
On that, at least, we can agree.
>
That an HHH can be created that does correctly
determine the halt status of this input is the
whole point.
>
int DD()
{
int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return Halt_Status;
}
>
Except that it doesn't, as your "input", being just that function, doesn't HAVE a halting status. It only gets that once it is paired with a specific version of HHH.
>
If that HHH aborts its simulation and returns 0, then it halts, and that HHH wasn't a correct halt decider.
>
Since you claim that is what you HHH does, and that would be the DD that it is given, it is thus clear that when we fix your input to be what you intend, your claim is false.
>
That you keep making your "clearly false due to the category error in it" claim just shows your stupidity.
>
You just don't understand the basic meaning of the terms you use, because you decided it would be better to be ignorant, then to know you are wrong.
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
When 1 or more statements of DDD are correctly
simulated by HHH then this correctly simulated
DDD cannot possibly reach its own “return statement”.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.