Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 5/14/2025 4:16 PM, dbush wrote:Do you agree that the meaning of the word "would" includes thatOn 5/14/2025 3:17 PM, olcott wrote:Ben knows that Professor Sisper does agree with myOn 5/14/2025 2:06 PM, Mike Terry wrote:And *yet again* you lie by implying Sipser agrees with your interpretation of the above when definitive proof has been repeatedly provided that he did not:On 14/05/2025 18:50, Mike Terry wrote:void DDD()On 14/05/2025 08:11, vallor wrote:Hmm, I thought some more about this. What's considered a bug (rather than e.g. a design error) is entirely dependent on the program's specification.Spent a couple of hours reading back the last few days of posts. Huboy,Not really due to a bug. D actually /does/ terminate on its own, and that's a consequence of PO's intended design. (Yes, there are bugs, but D's coding is what PO intended.)
what a train wreck. (But like a train wreck, it's hard to look
away, which might explain how this has been going on for 20(?) years.)
I want to thank both Richard's, wij, dbush, Mike, Keith, Fred,
Mikko, and anybody else I've forgotten for trying to explain to
Mr. Olcott and Mr. Flibble how you all see their claims. I wanted to
point out three things:
a) Mr. Olcott claims his HHH simulator detects an non-terminating
input and halts. But others (I forget who) report that -- due
to a bug -- D would actually terminate on its own. His HHH
simulator therefore gives the wrong answer.
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
<MIT Professor Sipser agreed to ONLY these verbatim words 10/13/2022>
If simulating halt decider H correctly simulates its
input D until H correctly determines that its simulated D
would never stop running unless aborted then
On Monday, March 6, 2023 at 2:41:27 PM UTC-5, Ben Bacarisse wrote:I exchanged emails with him about this. He does not agree with anythingYour dishonesty knows no bounds.
substantive that PO has written. I won't quote him, as I don't have
permission, but he was, let's say... forthright, in his reply to me.
meaning of my words and that got Ben all riled up.
Ben was convinced that I tricked professor Sipser
into agreeing with these words.
THE COMPLETE PROOF THAT PROFESSOR SIPSER DOES
AGREE WITH MY MEANING MY MY WORDS IS THAT
THE EXACT WORDS ONLY HAVE ONE MEANING.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.