Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.theory > #135160
| From | Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory |
| Subject | Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. |
| Date | 2025-11-06 18:37 +0000 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <20251106101506.504@kylheku.com> (permalink) |
| References | (23 earlier) <10eiea6$1731j$1@dont-email.me> <20251106091138.54@kylheku.com> <10eilo6$19had$1@dont-email.me> <10eim68$16eb4$4@dont-email.me> <10eink7$1a377$1@dont-email.me> |
On 2025-11-06, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 11/6/2025 11:34 AM, dbush wrote:
>> On 11/6/2025 12:26 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 11/6/2025 11:16 AM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
>>>> On 2025-11-06, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Call it a C interpreter. I will see if I can write one.
>>>>
>>>> What for? Abstract C interpretation shows the same issue that was
>>>> reproduced using the x86utm. We can pick up abandoned simulations and
>>>> continue them to show that the decider is incorrect.
>>>
>>> You got confused about resuming an aborted simulation
>>> by trying to start it in a different machine state.
>>
>> No, you got confused by not understanding that the directly executed H
>> is not part of the simulation and therefore not part of the machine state.
>>
>
> When D is simulated by H this requires H to simulate
> itself simulating D.
The simulation of D doesn't require H. It just happens that H is
initially conducting it.
H is initially conducting the simulation it in order to be able to
monitor it in detail, so that it can make a decision about D.
The simulation is not complete when it makes that decision.
At that point, another agent (such as the surrounding framework)
can take over the responsibility of making the interp_step calls
on the simulation object to continue the simulation.
You are confused by thinking that the simulation belongs to H,
and so H has to be rewound back and resumed.
Nothing like that must be done.
I'm going to propose a new API for simulating deciders,
which makes it clear:
bool H(void (*p)(void), interp *si)
{
// Same example "three step" logic as before
for (i = 0; i < 3; i++) {
if (iter_step(s))
return true;
}
return false;
}
The main driver program then is this:
int main(void)
{
interp *s = interp_create(D);
bool result = H(D, s);
printf("Input halts = %s.\n", result ? "true" : "false");
// reckoning: do we hang in this loop? Or will it halt?
while (!interp_step(s)) { /* nothing */ }
prinf("Input halted!\n");
// If H had returned false, "incorrect" is printed.
printf("H was %s about D.\n", result ? "correct" : "incorrect");
}
The simulating decider receives two arguments: the pointer to the
function, and a ready-made simulation on that function.
We are not restoring any context; we are simply making more interp_step
calls on the simulation after H returns.
This is the same as before, except we are not relying on the framework
to keep track of the unfinished simulation "under the hood".
We have made it an explicit parameter.
H's job is to decide whether P terminates using the simulation.
If there are any unfinished steps in the simuation after H is done,
step those to see whether H was correct.
The "under the hood" business was only needed in the context of the
x86utm, so that we could work in the "reckoning" logic without changing
the test cases in any way. The "reckoning" logic works with Halt7.obj
files that were compiled before it was developed.
--
TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr
Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal
Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca
Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-26 05:29 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Tristan Wibberley <tristan.wibberley+netnews2@alumni.manchester.ac.uk> - 2025-10-26 09:52 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-26 15:20 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-26 12:37 -0700
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-26 20:30 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-26 13:43 -0700
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-26 13:49 -0700
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-26 21:46 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-26 22:16 -0700
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-10-26 22:17 -0700
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-10-31 04:51 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-31 05:18 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-10-31 15:38 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 11:14 -0500
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-10-31 16:35 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 11:55 -0500
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 13:51 -0400
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-31 18:03 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 14:10 -0400
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-10-31 11:23 -0500
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Richard Damon <Richard@Damon-Family.org> - 2025-10-31 13:19 -0400
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-10-31 17:37 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-04 18:04 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-04 18:36 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-04 18:59 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-04 19:36 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-04 21:03 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-04 21:58 +0000
Re: x86utm with "reckoning" code: git repo with published commit. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-05 01:20 +0000
Kaz does not understand his own code. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 20:14 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-05 02:43 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 21:06 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-05 03:33 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-11-05 07:47 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 21:51 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-05 05:12 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-04 23:23 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-05 07:01 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 08:55 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-05 17:35 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 12:17 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 13:43 -0500
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:24 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 20:39 -0500
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:43 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 01:56 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 20:21 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 04:36 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 23:12 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 07:54 -0500
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 09:19 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-06 16:39 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 11:10 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 17:16 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 11:26 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 12:34 -0500
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 11:58 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 13:01 -0500
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 12:04 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 13:15 -0500
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 18:37 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-06 20:03 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 14:24 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 21:16 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 21:39 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 22:10 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 14:04 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 20:45 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 14:57 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 18:14 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 12:27 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 18:46 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 14:10 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-06 21:03 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:54 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 21:08 -0500
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 20:24 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 22:05 -0500
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 21:15 -0600
Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 22:18 -0500
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 21:27 -0600
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 22:32 -0500
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 21:38 -0600
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 22:39 -0500
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 21:50 -0600
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 22:53 -0500
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:57 -0800
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 21:57 -0600
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 23:04 -0500
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 22:15 -0600
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 23:25 -0500
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 23:00 -0600
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 07:51 -0500
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 09:16 -0600
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 10:22 -0500
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 10:08 -0600
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 11:26 -0500
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 10:49 -0600
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 11:56 -0500
Re: Olcott proves he's not interested in an honest dialogue by actively avoiding being clear olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 11:16 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 13:49 -0500
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-11-05 18:55 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:23 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-11-06 14:33 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-06 09:13 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Kaz Kylheku <643-408-1753@kylheku.com> - 2025-11-05 21:38 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:15 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 19:41 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 20:45 -0500
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 18:39 -0800
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 12:04 -0800
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. joes <noreply@example.org> - 2025-11-05 07:42 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 05:33 -0600
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. Mike Terry <news.dead.person.stones@darjeeling.plus.com> - 2025-11-05 16:43 +0000
Re: Kaz does not understand his own code. --- I AM PROVED EXACTLY CORRECT. olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-11-05 10:56 -0600
csiph-web