XPost: comp.theory   
   From: richard@damon-family.org   
      
   On 11/17/24 1:36 PM, olcott wrote:   
   > void DDD()   
   > {   
   >    HHH(DDD);   
   >    return;   
   > }   
   >   
   > _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]   
   >   
   > DDD emulated by any encoding of HHH that emulates N   
   > to infinity number of steps of DDD cannot possibly   
   > reach its "return" instruction final halt state.   
   >   
   > This applies to every DDD emulated by any HHH no   
   > matter the recursive depth of emulation. Thus it is   
   > a verified fact that the input to HHH never halts.   
   >   
   >   
      
   I will also add, that since you have dropped your requirements on HHH   
   (or are seeming to try to divorse yourself from previous assumptions)   
   there are MANY HHH that can complete the emulation, they just fail to be   
   "pure functions".   
      
   And once you define HHH to need to be a "pure function", you hit the   
   impass that your are trying to define DDD by a DIFFERENT definition of a   
   "Program" which is what emulation is normally defined to be on, as your   
   DDD is missing code that is needed to actually make it a program.   
      
   All this adds up to showing that you don't really understand the basics   
   of the field you are talking about, as you keep on making "rookie" errors.   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)