Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 5/15/2025 5:08 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:That is an implementation detail that is not required by the problem.On Thu, 15 May 2025 16:35:24 -0500, olcott wrote:Anyone that is intimately familiar with multi-tasking
On 5/15/2025 4:18 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:What has multi-tasking got to do with it? You are talking out of yourOn Thu, 15 May 2025 16:11:35 -0500, olcott wrote:Anyone that is intimately familiar with how multi-tasking operating
On 5/15/2025 3:59 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:It is not possible to make this work even by "writing an operatingOn Thu, 15 May 2025 15:47:16 -0500, olcott wrote:Since HHH does correctly simulate itself simulating DD we have
I overcome the proof of undecidability of the Halting Problem inIt is not possible for HHH to simulate DD because we are already
that the code that "does the opposite of whatever value that HHH
returns" becomes unreachable to DD correctly simulated by HHH.
int DD()
{
int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return Halt_Status;
}
HHH simulates DD that calls HHH(DD) to simulate itself again over
and over until HHH sees this repeating pattern and aborts or both
HHH and DD crash due to OOM error.
inside DD when we call HHH:
complete proof that you are wrong.
I had to write the whole x86utm operating system to make this work.
system"
so whatever you think you are doing it isn't addressing my core point:
you are NOT *fully* simulating DD by HHH because you are already inside
DD when you are calling HHH.
/Flibble
systems work will understand how HHH could emulate itself emulating its
input.
arse, Peter. :)
operating systems will know the details of how HHH
emulates itself emulating DDD.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.