Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #119150 > unrolled thread

Can someone please verify the execution trace of this?

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.c++

Contents

  Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-18 16:40 -0500
    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-18 18:33 -0400
    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of         this? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2024-05-18 21:12 -0400
      Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-18 22:16 -0500
        Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? jak <nospam@please.ty> - 2024-05-19 06:24 +0200
    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-19 20:08 +0200
      Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-19 14:00 -0500
        Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2024-05-19 15:24 -0400
        Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 03:52 +0200
          Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-19 21:43 -0500
            Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 07:09 +0200
              Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 00:38 -0500
                Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 08:41 +0200
                  Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 09:47 -0500
                    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 17:16 +0200
                      Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 11:01 -0500
                        Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 19:15 +0200
                          Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:20 -0500
                            Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2024-05-20 19:26 +0100
                              Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 14:09 -0500
                            Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 11:35 -0700
                              Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 14:15 -0500
                                Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:23 -0700
                                  Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 14:28 -0500
                                    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:30 -0700
                                      Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 14:34 -0500
                                        Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:35 -0700
                                        Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:36 -0700
                                          Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 14:38 -0500
                                            Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:42 -0700
                                        Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:38 -0700
                                          Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 14:40 -0500
                                            Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:44 -0700
                                              Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 14:48 -0500
                                                Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:50 -0700
                                                  Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:52 -0700
                                  Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:32 -0700
                                    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 14:37 -0500
                                      Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:41 -0700
                                        Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 14:45 -0500
                                          Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:47 -0700
                                            Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 14:53 -0500
                                              Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 13:04 -0700
                                                Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 15:10 -0500
                                                  Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 13:19 -0700
                                                    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 13:21 -0700
                                                    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 15:30 -0500
                                                      Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 13:31 -0700
                                                        Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 13:32 -0700
                                                          Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 15:36 -0500
                                                            Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 13:38 -0700
                                                              Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 15:52 -0500
                                                                Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 14:05 -0700
                                                                  Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 14:09 -0700
                                                                  Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 16:27 -0500
                                                            Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 13:48 -0700
                Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-05-20 10:10 +0200
                  Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 09:51 -0500
                    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Paavo Helde <eesnimi@osa.pri.ee> - 2024-05-20 18:05 +0300
                      Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 10:11 -0500
                    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 17:17 +0200
                      Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 11:07 -0500
                        Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-05-21 00:14 +0200
                          Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 17:23 -0500
            Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 20:37 +0800
              Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 10:02 -0500
                Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 00:21 +0800
                  Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 12:23 -0500
                    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 02:23 +0800
                      Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 14:07 -0500
              Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 19:23 -0700
                Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 19:31 -0700
                Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 22:58 -0500
                  Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-05-21 09:39 +0200
                  Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Janis Papanagnou <janis_papanagnou+ng@hotmail.com> - 2024-05-21 09:55 +0200
                    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 08:31 -0500
                      Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 15:56 +0200
                        Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 09:09 -0500
                          Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 20:01 +0200
                            Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 13:09 -0500
                              Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 20:13 +0200
                                Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 13:24 -0500
                                  Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 20:39 +0200
                                    Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 13:48 -0500
                                      Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 06:40 +0200
                                        Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 23:46 -0500
                                          Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 18:29 +0200
                                          Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 08:52 -0500
                                          Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 12:01 +0200
                                      Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 23:37 -0500
                                      Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 06:29 +0200
                                      D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 10:44 -0500
                                        Re: D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2024-05-22 18:27 +0200
                                        Re: D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 00:11 +0800
                                          Re: D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation [good attempt] olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 15:04 -0500
                                            Re: D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation [good attempt] olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 16:26 -0500
                                              Re: D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation [good attempt] wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2024-05-23 05:35 +0800
                                          Re: D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 16:56 -0500
                                            Re: D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 15:36 -0700
                                              Re: D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 17:52 -0500
                                                Re: D correctly simulated by H remains stuck in recursive simulation "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 18:33 -0700
            Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of         this? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2024-05-20 18:59 -0400
              Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 18:07 -0500
                Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of         this? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2024-05-20 19:21 -0400
                  Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 18:27 -0500
                    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of         this? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2024-05-21 07:48 -0400
                      Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 08:37 -0500
                        Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 12:03 -0700
                          Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 14:21 -0500
                            Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 14:39 -0700
                            Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of         this? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2024-05-21 17:55 -0400
                              Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 17:09 -0500
                                Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 15:18 -0700
                                  Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 15:20 -0700
                                    Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 17:29 -0500
                                      Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 15:34 -0700
                                        Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 18:07 -0500
                                          Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 16:54 -0700
                                            Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 19:05 -0500
                                Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and         halt? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2024-05-21 21:31 -0400
                                  Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 20:43 -0500
                                    Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and         halt? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2024-05-21 22:10 -0400
                                      Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 21:17 -0500
                                        Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and         halt? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2024-05-21 22:20 -0400
                                  Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 21:22 -0500
                                    Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-21 23:03 -0500
                                    Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 08:53 -0500
                                      Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and         halt? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2024-05-22 13:10 -0400
                                        Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 13:50 -0700
                                    Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and         halt? Sam <sam@email-scan.com> - 2024-05-22 07:01 -0400
                                      Re: Can D correctly simulated by H reach its own line 06 and halt? Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2024-05-22 13:50 +0200
                  Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 21:00 -0700
                    Can D simulated by any H possibly reach its own line 06 and halt? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 23:22 -0500
    Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? Marcel Mueller <news.5.maazl@spamgourmet.org> - 2024-05-20 15:14 +0200
      Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 10:10 -0500
      Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this? olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2024-05-20 10:13 -0500

Page 1 of 7  [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7  Next page →

#119150 — Can someone please verify the execution trace of this?

People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.

typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
01 int D(ptr x)
02 {
03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
04   if (Halt_Status)
05     HERE: goto HERE;
06   return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 int main()
10 {
11   H(D,D);
12   return 0;
13 }

In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly emulates
at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified by the
x86 instructions of D.

This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in the
order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in
recursive simulation.

*Execution Trace*
Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);

*keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
Line 01:
Line 02:
Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)

*Simulation invariant*
D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.

The key thing to note is that no D correctly simulated by any H of every
H/D pair specified by the above template ever reaches its own line 06
and halts.

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#119151

On 5/18/24 5:40 PM, olcott wrote:
> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
> 
> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
> 01 int D(ptr x)
> 02 {
> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
> 04   if (Halt_Status)
> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
> 06   return Halt_Status;
> 07 }
> 08
> 09 int main()
> 10 {
> 11   H(D,D);
> 12   return 0;
> 13 }
> 
> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly emulates
> at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified by the
> x86 instructions of D.
> 
> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in the
> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in
> recursive simulation.
> 
> *Execution Trace*
> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
> 
> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted)

But since you have defined that H WILL abort, that is irrelevant.

> Line 01:
> Line 02:
> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
> 
> *Simulation invariant*
> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
> 
> The key thing to note is that no D correctly simulated by any H of every
> H/D pair specified by the above template ever reaches its own line 06
> and halts.
> 

Without defining what H is, you can't define what the simulation is.

You are just showing that you don't understand what you are talking about.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119152 — Re: Can someone please verify the execution trace of this?

olcott writes:

> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
>
> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
> 01 int D(ptr x)
> 02 {
> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
> 04   if (Halt_Status)
> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
> 06   return Halt_Status;
> 07 }
> 08
> 09 int main()
> 10 {
> 11   H(D,D);
> 12   return 0;
> 13 }

This does not conform to any version of C or C++. This looks like a weird  
hybrid of C and BASIC, where each line of code is prepended with a numeric  
line number.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119153

On 5/18/2024 8:12 PM, Sam wrote:
> olcott writes:
> 
>> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
>> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
>>
>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>> 02 {
>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>> 07 }
>> 08
>> 09 int main()
>> 10 {
>> 11   H(D,D);
>> 12   return 0;
>> 13 }
> 
> This does not conform to any version of C or C++. This looks like a 
> weird hybrid of C and BASIC, where each line of code is prepended with a 
> numeric line number.
> 

I added the line numbers so that I could describe the execution
trace. It compiles under Microsoft with these flags:

cl  /GS- /std:c11 /c /arch:IA32 Test_Compile.c
cl  /GS- /std:c17 /c /arch:IA32 Test_Compile.c


-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119154

olcott ha scritto:
> On 5/18/2024 8:12 PM, Sam wrote:
>> olcott writes:
>>
>>> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
>>> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
>>>
>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
>>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>>> 02 {
>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>> 07 }
>>> 08
>>> 09 int main()
>>> 10 {
>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>> 12   return 0;
>>> 13 }
>>
>> This does not conform to any version of C or C++. This looks like a 
>> weird hybrid of C and BASIC, where each line of code is prepended with 
>> a numeric line number.
>>
> 
> I added the line numbers so that I could describe the execution
> trace. It compiles under Microsoft with these flags:
> 
> cl  /GS- /std:c11 /c /arch:IA32 Test_Compile.c
> cl  /GS- /std:c17 /c /arch:IA32 Test_Compile.c
> 
> 

Please don't answer the trolls. He had to cut a part of your post in
order to justify his useless message.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119156

Am 18.05.2024 um 23:40 schrieb olcott:
> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
> 
> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
> 01 int D(ptr x)
> 02 {
> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
> 04   if (Halt_Status)
> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
> 06   return Halt_Status;
> 07 }
> 08
> 09 int main()
> 10 {
> 11   H(D,D);
> 12   return 0;
> 13 }
> 
> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly emulates
> at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified by the
> x86 instructions of D.
> 
> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in the
> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in
> recursive simulation.
> 
> *Execution Trace*
> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
> 
> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
> Line 01:
> Line 02:
> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
> 
> *Simulation invariant*
> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
> 
> The key thing to note is that no D correctly simulated by any H of every
> H/D pair specified by the above template ever reaches its own line 06
> and halts.
> 

Other people think 30s about this, you think years about that.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119157

On 5/19/2024 1:08 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
> Am 18.05.2024 um 23:40 schrieb olcott:
>> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
>> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
>>
>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>> 02 {
>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>> 07 }
>> 08
>> 09 int main()
>> 10 {
>> 11   H(D,D);
>> 12   return 0;
>> 13 }
>>
>> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly emulates
>> at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified by the
>> x86 instructions of D.
>>
>> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in the
>> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in
>> recursive simulation.
>>
>> *Execution Trace*
>> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
>>
>> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
>> Line 01:
>> Line 02:
>> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
>>
>> *Simulation invariant*
>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
>>
>> The key thing to note is that no D correctly simulated by any H of every
>> H/D pair specified by the above template ever reaches its own line 06
>> and halts.
>>
> 
> Other people think 30s about this, you think years about that.
> 

It is the basis for my two decades long primary research into 
termination analysis. People on another forum have written
hundreds of posts claiming that D correctly simulated by H
reaches its own line 06 and halts.

*I have only gotten truthful answers on this forum*

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119158

On 5/19/24 3:00 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/19/2024 1:08 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 18.05.2024 um 23:40 schrieb olcott:
>>> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
>>> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
>>>
>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
>>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>>> 02 {
>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>> 07 }
>>> 08
>>> 09 int main()
>>> 10 {
>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>> 12   return 0;
>>> 13 }
>>>
>>> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly emulates
>>> at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified by the
>>> x86 instructions of D.
>>>
>>> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in the
>>> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in
>>> recursive simulation.
>>>
>>> *Execution Trace*
>>> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
>>>
>>> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
>>> Line 01:
>>> Line 02:
>>> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
>>>
>>> *Simulation invariant*
>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
>>>
>>> The key thing to note is that no D correctly simulated by any H of every
>>> H/D pair specified by the above template ever reaches its own line 06
>>> and halts.
>>>
>>
>> Other people think 30s about this, you think years about that.
>>
> 
> It is the basis for my two decades long primary research into 
> termination analysis. People on another forum have written
> hundreds of posts claiming that D correctly simulated by H
> reaches its own line 06 and halts.
> 
> *I have only gotten truthful answers on this forum*
> 

And I did show an H that can do that.

When you try to add requirements that outlaw my version, it makes the 
logic that you version uses clearly incorrect, so you are stuck.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119159

Am 19.05.2024 um 21:00 schrieb olcott:
> On 5/19/2024 1:08 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 18.05.2024 um 23:40 schrieb olcott:
>>> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
>>> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
>>>
>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
>>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>>> 02 {
>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>> 07 }
>>> 08
>>> 09 int main()
>>> 10 {
>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>> 12   return 0;
>>> 13 }
>>>
>>> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly emulates
>>> at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified by the
>>> x86 instructions of D.
>>>
>>> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in the
>>> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in
>>> recursive simulation.
>>>
>>> *Execution Trace*
>>> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
>>>
>>> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
>>> Line 01:
>>> Line 02:
>>> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
>>>
>>> *Simulation invariant*
>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
>>>
>>> The key thing to note is that no D correctly simulated by any H of every
>>> H/D pair specified by the above template ever reaches its own line 06
>>> and halts.
>>>
>>
>> Other people think 30s about this, you think years about that.
>>
> 
> It is the basis for my two decades long primary research into 
> termination analysis. People on another forum have written
> hundreds of posts claiming that D correctly simulated by H
> reaches its own line 06 and halts.
> 
> *I have only gotten truthful answers on this forum*
> 

That's not research, that's nonsense.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119160

On 5/19/2024 8:52 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
> Am 19.05.2024 um 21:00 schrieb olcott:
>> On 5/19/2024 1:08 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>> Am 18.05.2024 um 23:40 schrieb olcott:
>>>> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
>>>> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
>>>>
>>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
>>>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>>>> 02 {
>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>> 07 }
>>>> 08
>>>> 09 int main()
>>>> 10 {
>>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>>> 12   return 0;
>>>> 13 }
>>>>
>>>> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly 
>>>> emulates
>>>> at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified by the
>>>> x86 instructions of D.
>>>>
>>>> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in the
>>>> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in
>>>> recursive simulation.
>>>>
>>>> *Execution Trace*
>>>> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
>>>>
>>>> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
>>>> Line 01:
>>>> Line 02:
>>>> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
>>>>
>>>> *Simulation invariant*
>>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
>>>>
>>>> The key thing to note is that no D correctly simulated by any H of 
>>>> every
>>>> H/D pair specified by the above template ever reaches its own line 06
>>>> and halts.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Other people think 30s about this, you think years about that.
>>>
>>
>> It is the basis for my two decades long primary research into 
>> termination analysis. People on another forum have written
>> hundreds of posts claiming that D correctly simulated by H
>> reaches its own line 06 and halts.
>>
>> *I have only gotten truthful answers on this forum*
>>
> 
> That's not research, that's nonsense.
> 

This is not the forum to show that it is not nonsense this is
a simple C question that I should not even have to ask except
for a few people in another forum that consistently lie about
the answer.

I have been a professional C++ developer since Y2K. So I already
know the answer, I just need some competent people in this forum
to attest to this answer. I met Bjarne Stroustrup back when he
was going around the country promoting his new language.

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119161

Am 20.05.2024 um 04:43 schrieb olcott:
> On 5/19/2024 8:52 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 19.05.2024 um 21:00 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 5/19/2024 1:08 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>> Am 18.05.2024 um 23:40 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
>>>>> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
>>>>>
>>>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
>>>>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>>>>> 02 {
>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>>> 07 }
>>>>> 08
>>>>> 09 int main()
>>>>> 10 {
>>>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>>>> 12   return 0;
>>>>> 13 }
>>>>>
>>>>> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly 
>>>>> emulates
>>>>> at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified by 
>>>>> the
>>>>> x86 instructions of D.
>>>>>
>>>>> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in the
>>>>> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in
>>>>> recursive simulation.
>>>>>
>>>>> *Execution Trace*
>>>>> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
>>>>>
>>>>> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
>>>>> Line 01:
>>>>> Line 02:
>>>>> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
>>>>>
>>>>> *Simulation invariant*
>>>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
>>>>>
>>>>> The key thing to note is that no D correctly simulated by any H of 
>>>>> every
>>>>> H/D pair specified by the above template ever reaches its own line 06
>>>>> and halts.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Other people think 30s about this, you think years about that.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It is the basis for my two decades long primary research into 
>>> termination analysis. People on another forum have written
>>> hundreds of posts claiming that D correctly simulated by H
>>> reaches its own line 06 and halts.
>>>
>>> *I have only gotten truthful answers on this forum*
>>>
>>
>> That's not research, that's nonsense.
>>
> 
> This is not the forum to show that it is not nonsense this is
> a simple C question that I should not even have to ask except
> for a few people in another forum that consistently lie about
> the answer.
> 
> I have been a professional C++ developer since Y2K. So I already
> know the answer, I just need some competent people in this forum
> to attest to this answer. I met Bjarne Stroustrup back when he
> was going around the country promoting his new language.
> 

You ask the same questions over and over again for years.
It's like circling your thoughts before you fall asleep -
you don't think about whether it really makes sense.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119162

On 5/20/2024 12:09 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
> Am 20.05.2024 um 04:43 schrieb olcott:
>> On 5/19/2024 8:52 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>> Am 19.05.2024 um 21:00 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 5/19/2024 1:08 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>>> Am 18.05.2024 um 23:40 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
>>>>>> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>>>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
>>>>>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>>>>>> 02 {
>>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>> 07 }
>>>>>> 08
>>>>>> 09 int main()
>>>>>> 10 {
>>>>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>>>>> 12   return 0;
>>>>>> 13 }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly 
>>>>>> emulates
>>>>>> at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified 
>>>>>> by the
>>>>>> x86 instructions of D.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in the
>>>>>> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in
>>>>>> recursive simulation.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Execution Trace*
>>>>>> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
>>>>>> Line 01:
>>>>>> Line 02:
>>>>>> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Simulation invariant*
>>>>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 
>>>>>> 03.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The key thing to note is that no D correctly simulated by any H of 
>>>>>> every
>>>>>> H/D pair specified by the above template ever reaches its own line 06
>>>>>> and halts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Other people think 30s about this, you think years about that.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It is the basis for my two decades long primary research into 
>>>> termination analysis. People on another forum have written
>>>> hundreds of posts claiming that D correctly simulated by H
>>>> reaches its own line 06 and halts.
>>>>
>>>> *I have only gotten truthful answers on this forum*
>>>>
>>>
>>> That's not research, that's nonsense.
>>>
>>
>> This is not the forum to show that it is not nonsense this is
>> a simple C question that I should not even have to ask except
>> for a few people in another forum that consistently lie about
>> the answer.
>>
>> I have been a professional C++ developer since Y2K. So I already
>> know the answer, I just need some competent people in this forum
>> to attest to this answer. I met Bjarne Stroustrup back when he
>> was going around the country promoting his new language.
>>
> 
> You ask the same questions over and over again for years.
> It's like circling your thoughts before you fall asleep -
> you don't think about whether it really makes sense.
> 

It would take three people five minutes a piece.
Then I can go back to the other forum.

They have been lying about how the above code works
consistently for two years. I know how it works. I
learned C back when K & R was the standard.

Three people take five minutes a piece to confirm the
that the last sentence is correct.

typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
00 int H(ptr p, ptr i);
01 int D(ptr p)
02 {
03   int Halt_Status = H(p, p);
04   if (Halt_Status)
05     HERE: goto HERE;
06   return Halt_Status;
07 }
08
09 int main()
10 {
11   H(D,D);
12   return 0;
13 }

In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly emulates 
at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified by the 
x86 instructions of D.

This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in the 
order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in 
recursive simulation.

Execution Trace
Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);

keeps repeating (unless aborted)
Line 01:
Line 02:
Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)

Simulation invariant:
D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.

H must be a pure function
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_function#

*THIS ONE SENTENCE NEEDS TO BE CONFIRMED*
For every H/D pair of the above template D correctly simulated
by H cannot possibly reach its own final state at line 06 and halt.


-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119163

Am 20.05.2024 um 07:38 schrieb olcott:
> On 5/20/2024 12:09 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 20.05.2024 um 04:43 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 5/19/2024 8:52 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>> Am 19.05.2024 um 21:00 schrieb olcott:
>>>>> On 5/19/2024 1:08 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>>>> Am 18.05.2024 um 23:40 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
>>>>>>> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>>>>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
>>>>>>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>>>>>>> 02 {
>>>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>> 07 }
>>>>>>> 08
>>>>>>> 09 int main()
>>>>>>> 10 {
>>>>>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>>>>>> 12   return 0;
>>>>>>> 13 }
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly 
>>>>>>> emulates
>>>>>>> at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified 
>>>>>>> by the
>>>>>>> x86 instructions of D.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in 
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in
>>>>>>> recursive simulation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Execution Trace*
>>>>>>> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
>>>>>>> Line 01:
>>>>>>> Line 02:
>>>>>>> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *Simulation invariant*
>>>>>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own 
>>>>>>> line 03.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The key thing to note is that no D correctly simulated by any H 
>>>>>>> of every
>>>>>>> H/D pair specified by the above template ever reaches its own 
>>>>>>> line 06
>>>>>>> and halts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Other people think 30s about this, you think years about that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It is the basis for my two decades long primary research into 
>>>>> termination analysis. People on another forum have written
>>>>> hundreds of posts claiming that D correctly simulated by H
>>>>> reaches its own line 06 and halts.
>>>>>
>>>>> *I have only gotten truthful answers on this forum*
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That's not research, that's nonsense.
>>>>
>>>
>>> This is not the forum to show that it is not nonsense this is
>>> a simple C question that I should not even have to ask except
>>> for a few people in another forum that consistently lie about
>>> the answer.
>>>
>>> I have been a professional C++ developer since Y2K. So I already
>>> know the answer, I just need some competent people in this forum
>>> to attest to this answer. I met Bjarne Stroustrup back when he
>>> was going around the country promoting his new language.
>>>
>>
>> You ask the same questions over and over again for years.
>> It's like circling your thoughts before you fall asleep -
>> you don't think about whether it really makes sense.
>>
> 
> It would take three people five minutes a piece.
> Then I can go back to the other forum.
> 
> They have been lying about how the above code works
> consistently for two years. I know how it works. I
> learned C back when K & R was the standard.
> 
> Three people take five minutes a piece to confirm the
> that the last sentence is correct.
> 
> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
> 00 int H(ptr p, ptr i);
> 01 int D(ptr p)
> 02 {
> 03   int Halt_Status = H(p, p);
> 04   if (Halt_Status)
> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
> 06   return Halt_Status;
> 07 }
> 08
> 09 int main()
> 10 {
> 11   H(D,D);
> 12   return 0;
> 13 }
> 
> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly emulates 
> at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified by the 
> x86 instructions of D.
> 
> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in the 
> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in 
> recursive simulation.
> 
> Execution Trace
> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
> 
> keeps repeating (unless aborted)
> Line 01:
> Line 02:
> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
> 
> Simulation invariant:
> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
> 
> H must be a pure function
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_function#
> 
> *THIS ONE SENTENCE NEEDS TO BE CONFIRMED*
> For every H/D pair of the above template D correctly simulated
> by H cannot possibly reach its own final state at line 06 and halt.
> 
> 

You're dealing with things no one is concerned about.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119168

On 5/20/2024 1:41 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
> Am 20.05.2024 um 07:38 schrieb olcott:
>> On 5/20/2024 12:09 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>> Am 20.05.2024 um 04:43 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 5/19/2024 8:52 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>>> Am 19.05.2024 um 21:00 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>> On 5/19/2024 1:08 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>>>>> Am 18.05.2024 um 23:40 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>>>> People are saying that they have no idea what this code does
>>>>>>>> because they do not believe it conforms to c11 or c17.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
>>>>>>>> 00 int H(ptr x, ptr y);
>>>>>>>> 01 int D(ptr x)
>>>>>>>> 02 {
>>>>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(x, x);
>>>>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>> 07 }
>>>>>>>> 08
>>>>>>>> 09 int main()
>>>>>>>> 10 {
>>>>>>>> 11   H(D,D);
>>>>>>>> 12   return 0;
>>>>>>>> 13 }
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly 
>>>>>>>> emulates
>>>>>>>> at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order specified 
>>>>>>>> by the
>>>>>>>> x86 instructions of D.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H 
>>>>>>>> in the
>>>>>>>> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in
>>>>>>>> recursive simulation.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Execution Trace*
>>>>>>>> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *keeps repeating* (unless aborted)
>>>>>>>> Line 01:
>>>>>>>> Line 02:
>>>>>>>> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates 
>>>>>>>> D(D)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> *Simulation invariant*
>>>>>>>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own 
>>>>>>>> line 03.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The key thing to note is that no D correctly simulated by any H 
>>>>>>>> of every
>>>>>>>> H/D pair specified by the above template ever reaches its own 
>>>>>>>> line 06
>>>>>>>> and halts.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Other people think 30s about this, you think years about that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It is the basis for my two decades long primary research into 
>>>>>> termination analysis. People on another forum have written
>>>>>> hundreds of posts claiming that D correctly simulated by H
>>>>>> reaches its own line 06 and halts.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *I have only gotten truthful answers on this forum*
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> That's not research, that's nonsense.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This is not the forum to show that it is not nonsense this is
>>>> a simple C question that I should not even have to ask except
>>>> for a few people in another forum that consistently lie about
>>>> the answer.
>>>>
>>>> I have been a professional C++ developer since Y2K. So I already
>>>> know the answer, I just need some competent people in this forum
>>>> to attest to this answer. I met Bjarne Stroustrup back when he
>>>> was going around the country promoting his new language.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You ask the same questions over and over again for years.
>>> It's like circling your thoughts before you fall asleep -
>>> you don't think about whether it really makes sense.
>>>
>>
>> It would take three people five minutes a piece.
>> Then I can go back to the other forum.
>>
>> They have been lying about how the above code works
>> consistently for two years. I know how it works. I
>> learned C back when K & R was the standard.
>>
>> Three people take five minutes a piece to confirm the
>> that the last sentence is correct.
>>
>> typedef int (*ptr)();  // ptr is pointer to int function
>> 00 int H(ptr p, ptr i);
>> 01 int D(ptr p)
>> 02 {
>> 03   int Halt_Status = H(p, p);
>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>> 07 }
>> 08
>> 09 int main()
>> 10 {
>> 11   H(D,D);
>> 12   return 0;
>> 13 }
>>
>> In the above case a simulator is an x86 emulator that correctly 
>> emulates at least one of the x86 instructions of D in the order 
>> specified by the x86 instructions of D.
>>
>> This may include correctly emulating the x86 instructions of H in the 
>> order specified by the x86 instructions of H thus calling H(D,D) in 
>> recursive simulation.
>>
>> Execution Trace
>> Line 11: main() invokes H(D,D);
>>
>> keeps repeating (unless aborted)
>> Line 01:
>> Line 02:
>> Line 03: simulated D(D) invokes simulated H(D,D) that simulates D(D)
>>
>> Simulation invariant:
>> D correctly simulated by H cannot possibly reach past its own line 03.
>>
>> H must be a pure function
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pure_function#
>>
>> *THIS ONE SENTENCE NEEDS TO BE CONFIRMED*
>> For every H/D pair of the above template D correctly simulated
>> by H cannot possibly reach its own final state at line 06 and halt.
>>
>>
> 
> You're dealing with things no one is concerned about.
> 

It is a simple question about the behavior of C functions.
This group's purpose is the C/C++ language.

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119175

Am 20.05.2024 um 16:47 schrieb olcott:

> It is a simple question about the behavior of C functions.
> This group's purpose is the C/C++ language.

Your question is generic to most languages and you're
not asking how to do that in C or how to improve that.
And you're asking the same thing for years.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119177

On 5/20/2024 10:16 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
> Am 20.05.2024 um 16:47 schrieb olcott:
> 
>> It is a simple question about the behavior of C functions.
>> This group's purpose is the C/C++ language.
> 
> Your question is generic to most languages and you're
> not asking how to do that in C or how to improve that.
> And you're asking the same thing for years.
> 

Yes I am very persistent. I keep asking until
I get an answer.

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119180

Am 20.05.2024 um 18:01 schrieb olcott:
> On 5/20/2024 10:16 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 20.05.2024 um 16:47 schrieb olcott:
>>
>>> It is a simple question about the behavior of C functions.
>>> This group's purpose is the C/C++ language.
>>
>> Your question is generic to most languages and you're
>> not asking how to do that in C or how to improve that.
>> And you're asking the same thing for years.
>>
> 
> Yes I am very persistent. I keep asking until
> I get an answer.
> 

After some time you should recognize you're doing circles.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119181

On 5/20/2024 12:15 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
> Am 20.05.2024 um 18:01 schrieb olcott:
>> On 5/20/2024 10:16 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>> Am 20.05.2024 um 16:47 schrieb olcott:
>>>
>>>> It is a simple question about the behavior of C functions.
>>>> This group's purpose is the C/C++ language.
>>>
>>> Your question is generic to most languages and you're
>>> not asking how to do that in C or how to improve that.
>>> And you're asking the same thing for years.
>>>
>>
>> Yes I am very persistent. I keep asking until
>> I get an answer.
>>
> 
> After some time you should recognize you're doing circles.
> 

I am asking a straight forward question that people
keep ignoring it has nothing to do will my circles:
Ask until answered stops when answered.

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119184

On 20/05/2024 18:20, olcott wrote:
> On 5/20/2024 12:15 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>> Am 20.05.2024 um 18:01 schrieb olcott:
>>> On 5/20/2024 10:16 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>> Am 20.05.2024 um 16:47 schrieb olcott:
>>>>
>>>>> It is a simple question about the behavior of C functions.
>>>>> This group's purpose is the C/C++ language.
>>>>
>>>> Your question is generic to most languages and you're
>>>> not asking how to do that in C or how to improve that.
>>>> And you're asking the same thing for years.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Yes I am very persistent. I keep asking until
>>> I get an answer.
>>>
>>
>> After some time you should recognize you're doing circles.
>>
> 
> I am asking a straight forward question that people
> keep ignoring it has nothing to do will my circles:
> Ask until answered stops when answered.
> 

You haven't improved on: https://xkcd.com/1266/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#119187

On 5/20/2024 1:26 PM, Richard Harnden wrote:
> On 20/05/2024 18:20, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/20/2024 12:15 PM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>> Am 20.05.2024 um 18:01 schrieb olcott:
>>>> On 5/20/2024 10:16 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
>>>>> Am 20.05.2024 um 16:47 schrieb olcott:
>>>>>
>>>>>> It is a simple question about the behavior of C functions.
>>>>>> This group's purpose is the C/C++ language.
>>>>>
>>>>> Your question is generic to most languages and you're
>>>>> not asking how to do that in C or how to improve that.
>>>>> And you're asking the same thing for years.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes I am very persistent. I keep asking until
>>>> I get an answer.
>>>>
>>>
>>> After some time you should recognize you're doing circles.
>>>
>>
>> I am asking a straight forward question that people
>> keep ignoring it has nothing to do will my circles:
>> Ask until answered stops when answered.
>>
> 
> You haven't improved on: https://xkcd.com/1266/

I have and several PhD computer scientists agree. This
is not the place to discuss that.

-- 
Copyright 2024 Olcott "Talent hits a target no one else can hit; Genius
hits a target no one else can see." Arthur Schopenhauer

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 1 of 7  [1] 2 3 4 5 6 7  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.c++

csiph-web