Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    comp.ai.philosophy    |    Perhaps we should ask SkyNet about this    |    59,235 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 57,277 of 59,235    |
|    olcott to All    |
|    People are still trying to get away with    |
|    29 Jun 24 11:09:19    |
   
   XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   People are still trying to get away with disagreeing with   
   the semantics of the x86 language. That is isomorphic to   
   trying to get away with disagreeing with arithmetic.   
      
   typedef void (*ptr)();   
   int H0(ptr P);   
      
   void Infinite_Loop()   
   {   
    HERE: goto HERE;   
   }   
      
   void Infinite_Recursion()   
   {   
    Infinite_Recursion();   
   }   
      
   void DDD()   
   {   
    H0(DDD);   
   }   
      
   int main()   
   {   
    H0(Infinite_Loop);   
    H0(Infinite_Recursion);   
    H0(DDD);   
   }   
      
   Every C programmer that knows what an x86 emulator is knows   
   that when H0 emulates the machine language of Infinite_Loop,   
   Infinite_Recursion, and DDD that it must abort these emulations   
   so that itself can terminate normally.   
      
   When this is construed as non-halting criteria then simulating   
   termination analyzer H0 is correct to reject these inputs as   
   non-halting by returning 0 to its caller.   
      
   Simulating termination analyzers must report on the behavior   
   that their finite string input specifies thus H0 must report   
   that DDD correctly emulated by H0 remains stuck in recursive   
   simulation.   
      
   
|
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca