XPost: comp.theory   
   From: 643-408-1753@kylheku.com   
      
   On 2025-10-28, olcott  wrote:   
   > On 10/27/2025 10:40 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >> On 2025-10-28, olcott  wrote:   
   >>> Once H has correctly determines that its simulated   
   >>> D cannot possibly reach its own simulated "return"   
   >>> instruction final halt state it is nutty to do   
   >>> anything else besides abort and reject the input.   
   >>   
   >> I have traces which prove otherwise.   
   >   
   > Then you can't be telling the truth.   
      
   LOL!   
      
   Have you forgotten? (Sigh, I'm afraid the answer is yes ...)   
      
   - You used to post execution traces claiming that they   
   proved you were right.   
      
   - You used to deride others for not following your   
   execution traces in detail (maybe they are not skilled   
   engineers)   
      
   >   
   > int D()   
   > {   
   >    int Halt_Status = H(D);   
   >    if (Halt_Status)   
   >      HERE: goto HERE;   
   >    return Halt_Status;   
   > }   
   >   
   > H simulates D   
   > that calls H(D) to simulate D   
      
   This is just empty claptrap about an ill-defined program   
   with a missing definition of H, not an execution trace.   
      
   Mere Rhetoric Bereft of Reasoning (MRBOR)   
      
   Only execution traces are real.   
      
   You are a less skilled coding technician than I estimated.   
      
   --   
   TXR Programming Language: http://nongnu.org/txr   
   Cygnal: Cygwin Native Application Library: http://kylheku.com/cygnal   
   Mastodon: @Kazinator@mstdn.ca   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)