Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.theory > #118280
| From | Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.theory |
| Subject | Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c |
| Date | 2025-05-10 10:15 +0300 |
| Organization | - |
| Message-ID | <vvmudo$3dk35$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | <vvjr6k$2gaft$3@dont-email.me> |
On 2025-05-09 03:01:40 +0000, olcott said:
> On 5/8/2025 9:23 PM, Keith Thompson wrote:
>> Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> writes:
>>> On 5/8/25 7:53 PM, olcott wrote:
>> [...]
>>>> void DDD()
>>>> {
>>>> Â HHH(DDD);
>>>> Â return;
>>>> }
>>>> We don't need to look at any of my code for me
>>>> to totally prove my point. For example when
>>>> the above DDD is correctly simulated by HHH
>>>> this simulated DDD cannot possibly reach its own
>>>> "return" instruction.
>>>
>>> And thus not correctly simulatd.
>>>
>>> Sorry, there is no "OS Exemption" to correct simulaiton;.
>>
>> Perhaps I've missed something. I don't see anything in the above that
>> implies that HHH does not correctly simulate DDD. Richard, you've read
>> far more of olcott's posts than I have, so perhaps you can clarify.
>>
>> If we assume that HHH correctly simulates DDD, then the above code is
>> equivalent to:
>>
>> void DDD()
>> {
>> DDD();
>> return;
>> }
>>
>> which is a trivial case of infinite recursion. As far as I can tell,
>> assuming that DDD() is actually called at some point, neither the
>> outer execution of DDD nor the nested (simulated) execution of DDD
>> can reach the return statement. Infinite recursion might either
>> cause a stack overflow and a probable program crash, or an unending
>> loop if the compiler implements tail call optimization.
>>
>> I see no contradiction, just an uninteresting case of infinite
>> recursion, something that's well understood by anyone with a
>> reasonable level of programming experience. (And it has nothing to
>> do with the halting problem as far as I can tell, though of course
>> olcott has discussed the halting problem elsewhere.)
>>
>> Richard, what am I missing?
>>
> *****
> Now you are seeing what I was talking about.
> Now you are seeing why I needed to cross post
> to comp.lang.c
What were you told in comp.lang.c that you were not told in comp.theory?
--
Mikko
Back to comp.theory | Previous | Next — Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-05-10 10:15 +0300
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> - 2025-05-10 11:10 +0100
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-05-10 08:30 -0400
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-05-10 10:13 -0500
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED wij <wyniijj5@gmail.com> - 2025-05-10 23:39 +0800
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED "Fred. Zwarts" <F.Zwarts@HetNet.nl> - 2025-05-10 17:47 +0200
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-05-10 14:24 -0400
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-05-11 12:12 +0300
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-05-11 11:03 -0500
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-05-11 12:05 -0400
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com> - 2025-05-11 15:19 -0700
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-05-11 16:09 -0400
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-05-12 10:45 +0300
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-05-12 09:47 -0500
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-05-12 10:53 -0400
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-05-12 11:24 -0500
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-05-12 12:42 -0400
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-05-12 11:59 -0500
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-05-12 13:08 -0400
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> - 2025-05-12 12:19 -0500
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED dbush <dbush.mobile@gmail.com> - 2025-05-12 13:31 -0400
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-05-13 12:13 +0300
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-05-12 22:18 -0400
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED Richard Damon <richard@damon-family.org> - 2025-05-12 22:15 -0400
Re: Why I need to cross-post to comp.lang.c --- CORRECTLY REFUTED Mikko <mikko.levanto@iki.fi> - 2025-05-13 12:10 +0300
csiph-web