• Re: This first time anyone In the entire history of thehalting problem derived a correct return value for HHH(DD)

    From Richard Damon@richard@damon-family.org to comp.theory,sci.logic,comp.lang.c,comp.ai.philosophy on Sat Dec 7 03:50:17 2024
    From Newsgroup: comp.ai.philosophy

    olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> wrote:
    On 12/6/2024 8:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
    On 12/6/24 9:08 PM, olcott wrote:
    On 12/5/2024 11:20 AM, Bonita Montero wrote:
    Am 05.12.2024 um 05:20 schrieb olcott:
    There is an 80% chance that I will be alive in one month.
    There may be an extended pause in my comments.
    I will try to bring a computer to the out of town hospital.

    Maybe you'll solve your halting problem issues before you die.


    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);
    }


    I am sure that DD correctly emulated by HHH according to
    the semantics of the C programming language cannot possibly
    reach its own return instruction final halt state.

    How does HHH correctly emulated DD, if it isn't give tne code for the
    HHH that DD calls?


    As I have told you many dozens of times HHH and DD share
    the same global memory space within memory version of the
    Halt7.obj file.


    And thus you admit that your HHH isn’t the required “pure function” as its
    result is dependent on that contents of that global memory, and not just
    its input, as required by the definition of a global function,

    Thus, your entire proof is just a LIE.

    If you remove the requirement in your logic of HHH being a global function, then I have previously shown an HHH that CAN emulate its input to that
    final return, and thus refuting your claim.

    All you have done is just prove that you are nothing but an ignorant liar
    that doesn’t know what his words mean, and who refuse to learn, thus
    removing the defense of it just being a honest mistake.

    No, you are just showing how utterly STUPID and DISHONEST you have been in
    your claims and arguments.

    Sorry, but that it just the facts, facts you are just too stupid to
    understand.


    _DD()
    [0000213e] 55 push ebp
    [0000213f] 8bec mov ebp,esp
    [00002141] 51 push ecx
    [00002142] 683e210000 push 0000213e
    [00002147] e8a2f4ffff call 000015ee ; *call HHH in global memory* [0000214c] 83c404 add esp,+04
    [0000214f] 8945fc mov [ebp-04],eax
    [00002152] 837dfc00 cmp dword [ebp-04],+00
    [00002156] 7402 jz 0000215a
    [00002158] ebfe jmp 00002158
    [0000215a] 8b45fc mov eax,[ebp-04]
    [0000215d] 8be5 mov esp,ebp
    [0000215f] 5d pop ebp
    [00002160] c3 ret
    Size in bytes:(0035) [00002160]

    Line 1354 called on line 1388 https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c




    --- Synchronet 3.20a-Linux NewsLink 1.114