Re: Liars try to get away with DD simulated by HHH halts

From	Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com>
Newsgroups	comp.theory, comp.lang.c++, comp.lang.c
Subject	Re: Liars try to get away with DD simulated by HHH halts
Date	2025-11-19 01:06 +0000
Organization	A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID	<20251118170235.916@kylheku.com> (permalink)
References	(23 earlier) <10fgmm2$16skb$4@dont-email.me> <20251117190515.406@kylheku.com> <10fgo31$16skb$7@dont-email.me> <10fj0io$1th47$1@dont-email.me> <10fj2n8$1u41f$1@dont-email.me>

Cross-posted to 3 groups.

Show all headers | View raw

On 2025-11-19, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
> Liars try to claim that DD simulated by HHH
> (according to the semantics of the C programming
> language) reaches its own simulated "return"
> statement final halt state.

Without the implementation of HHH beng specified, we cannot tell; it
could be the case that HHH(DD) does not return.

If we assume that HHH(DD) returns 0, then obviously DD reaches
its return statement.

Otherwise obviously not.

> They are utterly dumbfounded when I ask them
> to prove this by a contiguous execution trace
> of DD simulated by HHH in C showing how and
> why DD reaches its own simulated "return"
> statement final halt state.

It's been demonstrated right inside your x86utm, remember?

> That is how and why we can know that they are
> liars and not merely confused.

You are completely at sea in the computer science of it,
/and/ you're not able to respond to code with codee.

-- 
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca

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

Thread

Liars try to get away with DD simulated by HHH halts olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-18 18:24 -0600
  Re: Liars try to get away with DD simulated by HHH halts Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-19 01:06 +0000

csiph-web