XPost: comp.theory, comp.lang.c++   
   From: 643-408-1753@kylheku.com   
      
   On 2025-11-23, olcott  wrote:   
   > On 11/22/2025 10:00 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >> On 2025-11-22, olcott  wrote:   
   >>> On 11/22/2025 11:56 AM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >>>> On 2025-11-22, olcott  wrote:   
   >>>>> is exactly the same as HHH except that DD does not   
   >>>>> call HHH1(DD) in recursive simulation.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> I already pointed out the massive problem with this.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> If HHH1 is identical to HHH, it means that HHH1 and HHH   
   >>>> are only different names for exactly the same function.   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> In the mathematical abstraction that simply pretends   
   >>> the behavioral details don't exist the math itself is   
   >>> also a damned liar.   
   >>   
   >> The fact that two different names are used to refer to exactly the same   
   >> function does not constitute a "behavior detail" of that function.   
   >>   
   >>> That you are trying to get away with ignoring these   
   >>> details from the stipulated perspective of the execution   
   >>> trace in C according to the semantics of C makes you   
   >>> a damned liar even when referring to the mathematical   
   >>> abstraction.   
   >>   
   >> If you want your C functions to correspond to recursive   
   >> functions in computation theory, you have to code them   
   >> according to certain rules.   
   >>   
   >> One of those is that you may not conclude that if f1 != f2 (pointer   
   >> comparison) then they are different functions.   
   >>   
   >   
   > HHH1 is at line  589 -  665   
   > HHH  is at line 1081 - 1156   
   >   
   > https://github.com/plolcott/x86utm/blob/master/Halt7.c   
   > When DD calls HHH through of C interpreter   
   > it does not call HHH1 because HHH1 has a   
   > different name and is at a different location.   
      
   That's just the thing! If this were correctly implemented then in fact   
   DD /wold be/ calling HHH1, using the name HHH.   
      
   Just like if I call you Peter, I'm addressing Olcott.   
      
   There is no such thing as HHH1 being the same as HHH, except that it's   
   not called by DD.   
      
   The situation can occur among the procedures of a procedural program,   
   whch are not modeling recursive functions in computation theory.   
      
   > When you show that you know this   
   > https://www.nongnu.org/txr/   
   > no one is going to think you are too stupid   
   > to know how C interpreters work.   
      
   The problem is that a collection of C functions don't correspond to the   
   recursive primtive functions in computation theory, unless you take very   
   careful measures.   
      
   Those measures are not required in software development in C,   
   though some aspects of them can be helpful in that endeavor.   
      
   It's not simply a problem of knowing C or not.   
      
   You've more or less correctly implemented incorrect /requirements/.   
      
   The requirements don't come from the semantics of C.   
      
   --   
   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)