Liste des Groupes | Revenir à s logic |
On 7/1/2024 9:37 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:I did not disagree with myself. It is only you inability to understand simple facts that :Op 01.jul.2024 om 14:46 schreef olcott:On 7/1/2024 9:27 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:On 7/1/2024 3:32 AM, Fred. Zwarts wrote:>
>
_DDD()
[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]
>
DDD is correctly emulated by HHH which calls an
emulated HHH(DDD) to repeat the process until aborted.
Once aborted the DDD emulated by HHH immediately stops.
>
At no point in this emulation does the call from DDD
correctly emulated by HHH to HHH(DDD) ever return.
>
You can understand this or fail to understand this
disagreement is flat out incorrect.
I understand it, but that does not contradict that the abort is one cycle too soon, which makes it incorrect.
> Not aborting will loop infinitely.
That you disagree with your own self proves that you are wrong.
If it is ever the case thatIt must abort to terminate the loop if the simulated HHH would not terminate, but this simulated HHH does return after N+1 cycles and therefore DDD will return, so here no abort is needed.
> Not aborting will loop infinitely.
THIS PROVES THAT ABORTING IS NECESSARILY CORRECT
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
IT IS 100% COMPLETELY CORRECT TO ABORT
Les messages affichés proviennent d'usenet.