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 57,300 of 59,235    |
|    olcott to Richard Damon    |
|    Re: Sequence of sequence, selection and     |
|    09 Jul 24 10:10:00    |
      XPost: comp.theory, sci.logic       From: polcott333@gmail.com              On 7/7/2024 12:28 PM, Richard Damon wrote:       > On 7/7/24 10:16 AM, olcott wrote:       >> _DDD()       >> [00002172] 55 push ebp ; housekeeping       >> [00002173] 8bec mov ebp,esp ; housekeeping       >> [00002175] 6872210000 push 00002172 ; push DDD       >> [0000217a] e853f4ffff call 000015d2 ; call HHH(DDD)       >> [0000217f] 83c404 add esp,+04       >> [00002182] 5d pop ebp       >> [00002183] c3 ret       >> Size in bytes:(0018) [00002183]       >>       >> Sufficient knowledge of the x86 language conclusively proves       >> that the call from DDD correctly emulated by HHH to HHH(DDD)       >> cannot possibly return for any pure function HHH.       > No, you don;t understand the difference between the partial simulation       > of DDD done by HHH from the actual behavior of DDD.       >       > Since HHH is a pure function, then if HHH returns to main, it will also       > return to DDD, so HHH can NOT POSSIBLE correctly determine that DDD will       > not halt if HHH eventually will return an answer. PERIOD.       >       > YOU LOGIC IS JUST INCORRECT.       >       >       >>       >> |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca