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

Groups > comp.lang.c++ > #125582

Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups

From olcott <polcott333@gmail.com>
Newsgroups comp.theory, comp.lang.c, comp.lang.c++
Subject Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups
Date 2026-11-01 15:26 -0600
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <11c8api$2bhnv$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References (7 earlier) <11c86r0$29k6t$1@dont-email.me> <11c8708$29m8c$1@dont-email.me> <11c8800$2a1d1$1@dont-email.me> <11c88au$2a5k5$1@dont-email.me> <11c89g2$2ao0o$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 11/1/2026 3:04 PM, dbush wrote:
> On 11/1/2026 3:44 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 11/1/2026 2:38 PM, dbush wrote:
>>> On 11/1/2026 3:21 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 11/1/2026 2:18 PM, dbush wrote:
>>>>> On 11/1/2026 1:53 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 11/1/2026 11:59 AM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>> On 11/1/2026 12:44 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 11/1/2026 9:09 AM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 11/1/2026 9:50 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On 11/1/2026 8:01 AM, dbush wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> On 11/1/2026 8:35 AM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> typedef int (*ptr)();
>>>>>>>>>>>> int HHH(ptr P);
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> 01 int DD()
>>>>>>>>>>>> 02 {
>>>>>>>>>>>> 03   int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
>>>>>>>>>>>> 04   if (Halt_Status)
>>>>>>>>>>>> 05     HERE: goto HERE;
>>>>>>>>>>>> 06   return Halt_Status;
>>>>>>>>>>>> 07 }
>>>>>>>>>>>> 08
>>>>>>>>>>>> 09 void main()
>>>>>>>>>>>> 10 {
>>>>>>>>>>>> 11  HHH(DD);
>>>>>>>>>>>> 12 }
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The C / C++ groups are the only people in the
>>>>>>>>>>>> world that did not flat out lie about this question:
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Does DD simulated by HHH ever reach its own "return"
>>>>>>>>>>>> statement while DD is being simulated by HHH?
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The above statement is unclear as "DD" and "HHH" could be 
>>>>>>>>>>> referring to:
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> * an algorithm, i.e. a fixed immutable sequence of 
>>>>>>>>>>> instructions that always generates the same output for a 
>>>>>>>>>>> given input.
>>>>>>>>>>> * a C function, i.e. a named address that can contain any 
>>>>>>>>>>> arbitrary set of instructions in sequence
>>>>>>>>>>> * a finite string, i.e. a 32-bit function pointer which is 
>>>>>>>>>>> the starting address of a C function.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> So please clarify whether each use of "HHH" and "DD" in the 
>>>>>>>>>>> above sentence refers to an algorithm, a C function, or a 
>>>>>>>>>>> finite string.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> DD is to be construed as a finite string of C source
>>>>>>>>>> code of a C function. HHH is to be construed as a C
>>>>>>>>>> interpreter that simulates C source code. HHH can
>>>>>>>>>> simulate itself simulating DD if needed.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> So would the following be correct?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Does C function DD simulated by C function HHH ever reach its 
>>>>>>>>> own "return" statement while C function DD is being simulated 
>>>>>>>>> by C function HHH?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Yes that seems correct.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does C function DD simulated by C function
>>>>>>>> HHH ever reach its own [SIMULATED] "return" statement
>>>>>>>> while C function DD is being simulated by
>>>>>>>> C function HHH?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Does there exist a finite number of N simulations
>>>>>>>> such that DD simulated by HHH reaches its own
>>>>>>>> simulated "return" statement while DD is being
>>>>>>>> simulated by HHH?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Let apply the same to the above, with a few more clarifications:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>  > Does there exist a finite number of N simulations that C 
>>>>>>> function HHH
>>>>>>>  > can be modified to perform such that C function DD simulated 
>>>>>>> by C function HHH reaches its own
>>>>>>>  > simulated "return" statement while C function DD is being
>>>>>>>  > simulated by C function HHH?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yes?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> There does not exist any HHH that simulates DD according
>>>>>> to the operational semantics of the C programming language
>>>>>> such that the simulated DD reaches its own simulated
>>>>>> return statement in any N finite number of simulations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>  > There does not exist any [algorithm|C function|finite string] 
>>>>> HHH that simulates [algorithm|C function|finite string] DD according
>>>>>  > to the operational semantics of the C programming language
>>>>>  > such that the simulated [algorithm|C function|finite string] DD 
>>>>> reaches its own simulated
>>>>>  > return statement in any N finite number of simulations.
>>>>>
>>>>> For each instance of "[algorithm|C function|finite string]" above,
>>>>> pick one and give the resulting sentence.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  >>>>>> DD is to be construed as a finite string of C source
>>>>  >>>>>> code of a C function. HHH is to be construed as a C
>>>>  >>>>>> interpreter that simulates C source code. HHH can
>>>>  >>>>>> simulate itself simulating DD if needed.
>>>>
>>>
>>> So would this be correct?
>>>
>>>  > There does not exist any *implementation of* C function HHH that 
>>> simulates C function DD according
>>>  > to the operational semantics of the C programming language
>>>  > such that the simulated C function DD reaches its own simulated
>>>  > return statement in any N finite number of simulations.
>>>
>>
>> Yes [any *implementation of* C function HHH] is actually clearer.
>>
> 
> Good.  Then *I agree that the above statement is correct*.
> 
The mathematical induction proof of non-termination takes
the simulation invariant of
*DD simulated by HHH does not halt while being simulated*
as formal proof of non-termination of DD while DD is being
simulated by HHH.

-- 
Copyright 2026 Olcott

Computation(Olcott)
Paraphrase of Emil Post definition of computation
All computations are equivalent to the application of finite
string transformation rules to finite string inputs to derive
any and all outputs.

Because Post canonical systems are Turing-equivalent, anything
that cannot be derived by applying finite string transformations
to finite strings is outside the scope of Church–Turing computation.

Decider(Olcott)
Correcting the misnomer term-of-the-art: decider
Every Decider(Olcott) must apply finite string transformation
inference steps to their finite string inputs that are relevant
to the decision criteria. It must make its decision on this basis.

Halt Decider(Olcott)
Decider(Olcott) entails that Halt Decider(Olcott) H(D) must apply
finite-string inference steps according to the operational semantics
of the source-code computation language of D. The only way to determine
the halting property of a finite string input is to examine the same
behavior as the behavior of D simulated by H.

*Succinct refutation of the Halting Theorem*
https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/README.md

My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning expressed in language"
reliably computable for the entire body of general knowledge.
The complete structure of this system is now defined.

Back to comp.lang.c++ | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread

Thread

Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 07:35 -0600
  Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-01 13:46 +0000
    Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 08:00 -0600
      Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-01 20:44 +0000
        Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 14:49 -0600
          Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-01 20:56 +0000
        Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 14:59 -0600
          Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-11-01 13:02 -0800
            Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 15:14 -0600
              Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-11-01 13:31 -0800
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 15:45 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-01 21:47 +0000
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-11-01 14:15 -0800
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 16:26 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-11-01 15:10 -0800
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 17:15 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups dart200 <user7160@newsgrouper.org.invalid> - 2026-11-01 18:24 -0800
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups makendo <makendo@makendo.invalid> - 2026-11-02 19:10 +0800
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups --- 4-way consensus olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-02 08:09 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups --- 4-way consensus Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-02 14:21 +0000
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups --- 4-way consensus olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-02 08:26 -0600
                Olcott's HHH: the counterexample, the missing proof, and borrowed  "agreements" Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-02 14:33 +0000
          Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-01 21:03 +0000
            Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 15:17 -0600
              Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-01 21:20 +0000
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 15:30 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-01 21:39 +0000
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 15:53 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-01 22:00 +0000
  Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 08:09 -0600
  Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 08:50 -0600
    Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 10:09 -0500
      Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 11:44 -0600
        Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 12:59 -0500
          Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 12:10 -0600
            Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 13:36 -0500
          Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 12:53 -0600
            Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups (not Olcott) olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 13:39 -0600
            Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 15:18 -0500
              Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 14:21 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 15:38 -0500
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 14:44 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 16:04 -0500
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 15:26 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 19:09 -0500
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 18:16 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 15:42 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups Python <python@cccp.invalid> - 2026-11-01 21:46 +0000
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 15:56 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-01 16:09 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups --- Most important agreement in five years olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-04 18:56 -0600
                Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups --- Most important agreement in five years olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-04 19:03 -0600
  Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com> - 2026-11-02 07:41 +0100
    Re: Why I post to the C / C++ groups --- 4-way consensus olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2026-11-02 07:58 -0600

csiph-web