Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or DD counts
as halt, or others?
On 9/7/25 7:08 AM, wij wrote:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or DD counts
as halt, or others?
"Halting" in the case of C functions, is if the C function being talk'halt' needs to be precisely defined, otherwise the discussion of POOH is pointless.
about eventually returns to what would have been its caller when it is
put into a context that called it.
The key point isn't so much "which return", but who is returning.I think you mean:
Note, the question is about the execution of the function, which canYou only make things complicated.
also be answered by a correct and complete simulation. The fact that a partial simulation didn't yet reach a return doesn't say anything about halting or not halting.
The other key is that when you talk about "a function", the scope isn't
just the one C function body, but if that body calls to other functions, those are included as part of the "function" that needs to be analysed,
as the question is only meaningful as a yes/no question if the
"function" being looked at is pure and complete, which means it includes
ALL the code it uses. A function body with an external reference within
it may have an answer dependent on what that referent does.
Thus, for POs "DD" as specified which excludes from its representaton
the code of HHH, the answer is NOT a simple yes or no, but is an
expression like DD will halt if HHH(DD) returns 0, and not halt if
HHH(DD) returns non-zero. But of course, a simple decide can't give that sort of answer, so it isn't a valid question for a simple decider, and
thus his whole argument is just a category error.
On Sun, 2025-09-07 at 08:00 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
On 9/7/25 7:08 AM, wij wrote:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or DD counts
as halt, or others?
"Halting" in the case of C functions, is if the C function being talk
about eventually returns to what would have been its caller when it is
put into a context that called it.
'halt' needs to be precisely defined, otherwise the discussion of POOH is pointless.
On 9/7/2025 8:20 AM, wij wrote:
On Sun, 2025-09-07 at 08:00 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
On 9/7/25 7:08 AM, wij wrote:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or DD counts
as halt, or others?
"Halting" in the case of C functions, is if the C function being talk about eventually returns to what would have been its caller when it is put into a context that called it.
'halt' needs to be precisely defined, otherwise the discussion of POOH is pointless.
Can DD emulated by any HHH according to the semanticsWhat you say bear no meaning. Unless you can answer the question:
of the x86 language possibly reach its own emulated
"ret" instruction final halt state?
Abort means that HHH stops emulating DD.
On 9/7/2025 8:20 AM, wij wrote:
On Sun, 2025-09-07 at 08:00 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
On 9/7/25 7:08 AM, wij wrote:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH
or DD counts
as halt, or others?
"Halting" in the case of C functions, is if the C function being talk
about eventually returns to what would have been its caller when it is
put into a context that called it.
'halt' needs to be precisely defined, otherwise the discussion of POOH
is pointless.
Can DD emulated by any HHH according to the semantics
of the x86 language possibly reach its own emulated
"ret" instruction final halt state?
Abort means that HHH stops emulating DD.
On Sun, 2025-09-07 at 09:37 -0500, olcott wrote:
On 9/7/2025 8:20 AM, wij wrote:
On Sun, 2025-09-07 at 08:00 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
On 9/7/25 7:08 AM, wij wrote:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or DD counts
as halt, or others?
"Halting" in the case of C functions, is if the C function being talk
about eventually returns to what would have been its caller when it is >>>> put into a context that called it.
'halt' needs to be precisely defined, otherwise the discussion of POOH is pointless.
Can DD emulated by any HHH according to the semantics
of the x86 language possibly reach its own emulated
"ret" instruction final halt state?
Abort means that HHH stops emulating DD.
What you say bear no meaning. Unless you can answer the question:
What is the value of proposition X&~X? why? True or False (or Undecidable if none fits)?
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or
DD counts
as halt, or others?
On 9/7/25 10:37 AM, olcott wrote:
Can DD emulated by any HHH according to the semantics
of the x86 language possibly reach its own emulated
"ret" instruction final halt state?
Abort means that HHH stops emulating DD.
And where is that definition coming from?
On 2025-09-07 11:08:47 +0000, wij said:It seems your 'halt' means TM reads a symbol that has no corresponding action. I thought 'halt' means TM enters one of its final states, e.g. accept/reject state.
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or
DD counts
as halt, or others?
About Turing machines it means a configuration for which the rules
don't specfy any action. About other automata the same or similar
rule can be used.
For typical computer machine language a rasonable definition is that
the program has halted when the instrucion pointer points to a memory location that is not a part of the program asked about or a halt
instruction is executed. A similar definition can be used for C and
other typical programming langages.
On Mon, 2025-09-08 at 11:20 +0300, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-09-07 11:08:47 +0000, wij said:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or
DD counts
as halt, or others?
About Turing machines it means a configuration for which the rules
don't specfy any action. About other automata the same or similar
rule can be used.
For typical computer machine language a rasonable definition is that
the program has halted when the instrucion pointer points to a memory
location that is not a part of the program asked about or a halt
instruction is executed. A similar definition can be used for C and
other typical programming langages.
It seems your 'halt' means TM reads a symbol that has no corresponding action.
I thought 'halt' means TM enters one of its final states, e.g. accept/reject state.
I don't konw how TM is defined in the 'undefined' condition.
On 2025-09-07 11:08:47 +0000, wij said:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or
DD counts
as halt, or others?
About Turing machines it means a configuration for which the rules
don't specfy any action. About other automata the same or similar
rule can be used.
For typical computer machine language a rasonable definition is that
the program has halted when the instrucion pointer points to a memory location that is not a part of the program asked about or a halt
instruction is executed. A similar definition can be used for C and
other typical programming langages.
On Mon, 2025-09-08 at 11:20 +0300, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-09-07 11:08:47 +0000, wij said:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or
DD counts
as halt, or others?
About Turing machines it means a configuration for which the rules
don't specfy any action. About other automata the same or similar
rule can be used.
For typical computer machine language a rasonable definition is that
the program has halted when the instrucion pointer points to a memory
location that is not a part of the program asked about or a halt
instruction is executed. A similar definition can be used for C and
other typical programming langages.
It seems your 'halt' means TM reads a symbol that has no corresponding action.
I thought 'halt' means TM enters one of its final states, e.g. accept/reject state.
I don't konw how TM is defined in the 'undefined' condition.
On 9/8/2025 5:57 AM, wij wrote:BULLSHIT !!!
On Mon, 2025-09-08 at 11:20 +0300, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-09-07 11:08:47 +0000, wij said:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or DD counts
as halt, or others?
About Turing machines it means a configuration for which the rules
don't specfy any action. About other automata the same or similar
rule can be used.
For typical computer machine language a rasonable definition is that
the program has halted when the instrucion pointer points to a memory location that is not a part of the program asked about or a halt instruction is executed. A similar definition can be used for C and
other typical programming langages.
It seems your 'halt' means TM reads a symbol that has no corresponding action.
That is one correct way to look at at.
I thought 'halt' means TM enters one of its final states, e.g. accept/reject state.
Technically any TM that immediately stops
running is a decider.
In computability theory, a decider is a Turing
machine that halts for every input. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Decider_(Turing_machine)
I don't konw how TM is defined in the 'undefined' condition.
On Mon, 2025-09-08 at 11:20 +0300, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-09-07 11:08:47 +0000, wij said:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or> >>> > DD counts
as halt, or others?
About Turing machines it means a configuration for which the rules
don't specfy any action. About other automata the same or similar
rule can be used.
For typical computer machine language a rasonable definition is that
the program has halted when the instrucion pointer points to a memory
location that is not a part of the program asked about or a halt
instruction is executed. A similar definition can be used for C and
other typical programming langages.
It seems your 'halt' means TM reads a symbol that has no corresponding action.
I thought 'halt' means TM enters one of its final states, e.g.
accept/reject state.I don't konw how TM is defined in the 'undefined' condition.
On 9/8/2025 3:20 AM, Mikko wrote:
On 2025-09-07 11:08:47 +0000, wij said:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or
DD counts
as halt, or others?
About Turing machines it means a configuration for which the rules
don't specfy any action. About other automata the same or similar
rule can be used.
There is no transition out of any final halt state.
For typical computer machine language a rasonable definition is that
the program has halted when the instrucion pointer points to a memory
location that is not a part of the program asked about or a halt
instruction is executed. A similar definition can be used for C and
other typical programming langages.
For C functions its simplest to think of their "return"
statement as their final state.
On 07/09/2025 17:44, Richard Damon wrote:
On 9/7/25 10:37 AM, olcott wrote:
<snip>
Can DD emulated by any HHH according to the semantics
of the x86 language possibly reach its own emulated
"ret" instruction final halt state?
Abort means that HHH stops emulating DD.
And where is that definition coming from?
Olcott makes the rules up as he goes along. I sometimes think he sees a "decider" as a program with responsibility for dictating whether a
program halts, rather than simply for determining whether...and /having/ decided, its decision is final, and reality can go swing.
On 8/2/2024 7:19 PM, Mike Terry wrote:--
Definition: A TM P given input I is said to "halt" iff ?????
or whatever...
I think this is a rather hopeless venture without
formally defining the representation of a TM. For
example: In some formulations, there are specific
states defined as "halting states" and the machine
only halts if either the start state is a halt state or
there is a transition to a halt state within the execution
trace; In another formulation, machines halt if there
is a transition to an undefined state. Note a few things:
1) the if's above are really iff's, 2) these and many
other definitions all have equivalent computing prowess,
3) Some formulations define results by what is left on
the tape (or other storage device) while others add the
actual halting state to determine the results.
In a conversation about such topics, gentlemen of good
faith and reasonable knowledge can simple ignore these
differences and not go off the rails.
On Sun, 2025-09-07 at 09:37 -0500, olcott wrote:
On 9/7/2025 8:20 AM, wij wrote:
On Sun, 2025-09-07 at 08:00 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
On 9/7/25 7:08 AM, wij wrote:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or DD counts
as halt, or others?
"Halting" in the case of C functions, is if the C function being talk
about eventually returns to what would have been its caller when it is >>>> put into a context that called it.
'halt' needs to be precisely defined, otherwise the discussion of POOH is pointless.
Can DD emulated by any HHH according to the semantics
of the x86 language possibly reach its own emulated
"ret" instruction final halt state?
Abort means that HHH stops emulating DD.
What you say bear no meaning. Unless you can answer the question:
What is the value of proposition X&~X? why? True or False (or Undecidable if none fits)?
On 9/7/2025 9:53 AM, wij wrote:
On Sun, 2025-09-07 at 09:37 -0500, olcott wrote:
On 9/7/2025 8:20 AM, wij wrote:
On Sun, 2025-09-07 at 08:00 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
On 9/7/25 7:08 AM, wij wrote:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in
HHH or DD counts
as halt, or others?
"Halting" in the case of C functions, is if the C function being talk >>>>> about eventually returns to what would have been its caller when it is >>>>> put into a context that called it.
'halt' needs to be precisely defined, otherwise the discussion of
POOH is pointless.
Can DD emulated by any HHH according to the semantics
of the x86 language possibly reach its own emulated
"ret" instruction final halt state?
Abort means that HHH stops emulating DD.
What you say bear no meaning. Unless you can answer the question:
What is the value of proposition X&~X? why? True or False (or
Undecidable if none fits)?
Within the principle of explosion that expression
proves the Trump is the risen Christ and also
proves the Trump is not the risen Christ.
the law according to which any statement can
be proven from a contradiction. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Principle_of_explosion
The POE is a psychotic break from reality that
is only possible because modern symbolic logic
(since the syllogism) quit having semantics directly
embedded within the formal system.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relevance_logic
Tries to fix this error.
On 9/7/2025 8:20 AM, wij wrote:
On Sun, 2025-09-07 at 08:00 -0400, Richard Damon wrote:
On 9/7/25 7:08 AM, wij wrote:
Particularly in POO Halt decider where C is used to describe TM.
E.g. Terminating TM can only hit one 'ret' (in C), which one in HHH or >>>> DD counts
as halt, or others?
"Halting" in the case of C functions, is if the C function being talk
about eventually returns to what would have been its caller when it is
put into a context that called it.
'halt' needs to be precisely defined, otherwise the discussion of POOH
is pointless.
Can DD emulated by any HHH according to the semantics
of the x86 language possibly reach its own emulated
"ret" instruction final halt state?
Abort means that HHH stops emulating DD.
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 1,069 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 78:55:09 |
| Calls: | 13,726 |
| Calls today: | 1 |
| Files: | 186,961 |
| D/L today: |
5,345 files (1,393M bytes) |
| Messages: | 2,410,362 |