Liste des Groupes | Revenir à c theory |
On 5/16/25 10:00 AM, olcott wrote:Mike explains all of the details of how theOn 5/16/2025 8:25 AM, joes wrote:Only PATHOLOGICAL LIARS excpet that the call HHH(DD) doesn't mean to answer about what the actual DD does when run,Am Wed, 14 May 2025 12:22:26 -0500 schrieb olcott:>On 5/14/2025 12:15 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:>On 14/05/2025 17:43, olcott wrote:On 5/14/2025 11:16 AM, Richard Heathfield wrote:On 14/05/2025 17:04, olcott wrote:The proof itself cannot exist because it is missing a key element.
>The HP proofs require an input D that can actually do the oppositeAgreed. That is precisely what Turing proved.
of whatever value that H returns. Such an input cannot possibly
exist.
Yes, it is missing the halt decider.
>When you try to encode *AN INPUT* that actually does the opposite ofDD is exactly that.
whatever value that its termination analyzer returns in a fully
specified language such as C you will find this is impossible.
>In a less fully specified language it is far too easy to get confusedDD (or its code) calling the aborting HHH is the input.
about what *AN INPUT* is and what it is not.
>
int main()
{
DD(); // Only idiots expect HHH to report on its caller.
}
>
Oh, I guess that answers who you are.
You just admitted that you think the truth is idiotic.
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.