home bbs files messages ]

Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"

   sci.logic      Logic -- math, philosophy & computationa      262,912 messages   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]

   Message 261,324 of 262,912   
   Kaz Kylheku to olcott   
   Re: The halting problem is incorrect two   
   26 Nov 25 23:55:50   
   
   XPost: comp.theory, comp.ai.philosophy, sci.math   
   From: 643-408-1753@kylheku.com   
      
   On 2025-11-26, olcott  wrote:   
   > On 11/26/2025 4:19 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >> On 2025-11-26, olcott  wrote:   
   >>> On 11/26/2025 3:47 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >>>> On 2025-11-26, dbush  wrote:   
   >>>>> On 11/26/2025 2:55 PM, olcott wrote:   
   >>>>>> On 11/26/2025 12:35 PM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:   
   >>>>>>> On 2025-11-26, olcott  wrote:   
   >>>>>>>> In other words you are trying to get away with   
   >>>>>>>> disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language   
   >>>>>>>> or the semantics of the C programing language.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>> Says the pitiful twit who has no meaningful response to results shown   
   >>>>>>> with code.   
   >>>>>>>   
   >>>>>>   
   >>>>>> I am not the one that came up with the jackass idea   
   >>>>>> of restarting a simulation after it has already   
   >>>>>> conclusively proved that it cannot possibly halt.   
   >>>>>   
   >>>>> That the continuation of the simulation reaches a final halting state   
   >>>>> conclusively proves otherwise.   
   >>>>   
   >>>> And Olcott has no idea how to fix it and is no longer   
   >>>> able to engage with tasks involving code.   
   >>>>   
   >>>   
   >>> void Infinite_Loop()   
   >>> {   
   >>>     HERE: goto HERE;   
   >>>     return;   
   >>> }   
   >>>   
   >>> And the continuation of the simulation   
   >>> at the "return" statement "proves"   
   >>> by deception that infinite loops halt.   
   >>   
   >> I have no idea what you are blabbing about, and neither do you.   
   >>   
   >   
   > We could simulate Infinite_Loop() until it   
   > proves that it cannot possibly stop running   
   > unless aborted, then abort it. Now to use   
   > your method we can "resume" the simulation   
   > at a different machine state.   
      
   No, you fucking idiot.   
      
   > This simulation is "resumed" at the "return"   
   > instruction.   
      
   No, you fucking idiot.   
      
   "In other words you are trying to get away with   
   disagreeing with the semantics of the x86 language   
   or the semantics of the C programing language."   
      
   See above.   
      
   --   
   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)   

[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]


(c) 1994,  bbs@darkrealms.ca