XPost: comp.theory, comp.lang.c++   
   From: polcott333@gmail.com   
      
   On 11/22/2025 11:24 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   > 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.   
   >   
      
   You are trying to get away with this lie   
   about the semantics of C?   
      
   int main()   
   {   
      HHH(DD);   
      HHH1(DD);   
      return 0;   
   }   
      
   _main()   
   [000022c4] 55             push ebp   
   [000022c5] 8bec           mov ebp,esp   
   [000022c7] 6834220000     push 00002234 ; push DD   
   [000022cc] e833f3ffff     call 00001604 ; call HHH   
   [000022d1] 83c404         add esp,+04   
   [000022d4] 6834220000     push 00002234 ; push DD   
   [000022d9] e856f2ffff     call 00001534 ; call HHH1   
   [000022de] 83c404         add esp,+04   
   [000022e1] 33c0           xor eax,eax   
   [000022e3] 5d             pop ebp   
   [000022e4] c3             ret   
   Size in bytes:(0033) [000022e4]   
      
      
      
   --   
   Copyright 2025 Olcott   
      
   My 28 year goal has been to make   
   "true on the basis of meaning" computable.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)