void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
Do you really think that anyone knowing the C
programming language is too stupid to see that
DDD simulated by HHH cannot possibly return?
On 4/3/2025 9:39 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
[Post in comp.lang.c, read in comp.lang.c]
On 04/04/2025 02:27, olcott wrote:
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
Do you really think that anyone knowing the C
programming language is too stupid to see that
DDD simulated by HHH cannot possibly return?
Anyone knowing the C language will know on seeing your code that
I am correct
everything else is off-topic for this post.
On 4/3/2025 11:31 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
On 04/04/2025 05:08, olcott wrote:
On 4/3/2025 9:58 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
[Post in comp.lang.c, read in comp.lang.c]
On 04/04/2025 03:45, olcott wrote:
On 4/3/2025 9:39 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
[Post in comp.lang.c, read in comp.lang.c]
On 04/04/2025 02:27, olcott wrote:
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
Do you really think that anyone knowing the C
programming language is too stupid to see that
DDD simulated by HHH cannot possibly return?
Anyone knowing the C language will know on seeing your code
that
I am correct
Oh, I see. Yes, of course you are. Well done.
"DDD simulated by HHH cannot possibly return".
Then HHH cannot possibly simulate DDD.
everything else is off-topic for this post.
And HHH() is off-topic for this newsgroup. You started the
thread in comp.lang.c, so to make it topical you'd have to
rewrite HHH() in C instead of peppering your code with
assembly language calls.
The halting problem in C would seem to be relevant to C groups
The C code would be topical, yes. [Note that comp.lang.c++ is
not a C group. It's a C++ group.] But the assembly language
calls are not topical here.
typedef void (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);
int DD()
{
int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return Halt_Status;
}
int main()
{
HHH(DD);
}
DD simulated by HHH gets stuck on its first line.
Then HHH is failing to correctly analyse DD for determining
whether it halts, and therefore it is failing to address the
Halting Problem.
Non-working simulations are a dime a dozen, and they prove
nothing.
Fully operating code.
I am correct
On 4/3/2025 9:58 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
[Post in comp.lang.c, read in comp.lang.c]
On 04/04/2025 03:45, olcott wrote:
On 4/3/2025 9:39 PM, Richard Heathfield wrote:
[Post in comp.lang.c, read in comp.lang.c]
On 04/04/2025 02:27, olcott wrote:
void DDD()
{
HHH(DDD);
return;
}
Do you really think that anyone knowing the C
programming language is too stupid to see that
DDD simulated by HHH cannot possibly return?
Anyone knowing the C language will know on seeing your code that
I am correct
Oh, I see. Yes, of course you are. Well done.
"DDD simulated by HHH cannot possibly return".
Then HHH cannot possibly simulate DDD.
everything else is off-topic for this post.
And HHH() is off-topic for this newsgroup. You started the
thread in comp.lang.c, so to make it topical you'd have to
rewrite HHH() in C instead of peppering your code with assembly
language calls.
The halting problem in C would seem to be relevant to C groups
typedef void (*ptr)();
int HHH(ptr P);
int DD()
{
int Halt_Status = HHH(DD);
if (Halt_Status)
HERE: goto HERE;
return Halt_Status;
}
int main()
{
HHH(DD);
}
DD simulated by HHH gets stuck on its first line.
*Simulating termination analyzer Principle*
It is always correct for any simulating termination
analyzer to stop simulating and reject any input that
would otherwise prevent its own termination. The
only rebuttal to this is rejecting the notion that
deciders must always halt.
Sysop: | Keyop |
---|---|
Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
Users: | 546 |
Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
Uptime: | 01:51:49 |
Calls: | 10,387 |
Calls today: | 2 |
Files: | 14,061 |
Messages: | 6,416,749 |