Re: Solution to the halting Problem?

From: Stewart Gordon (smjg_1998_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 07/23/04 

Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2004 17:20:53 +0100

Peter Olcott wrote:

>> Peter does not understand that algorithms produce a result. In
>> which form this result is presented is completely unimportant and
>> such not part of the algorithm.
>
> Since the result is returned to the program being analyzed, and the
> result changes the behavior of the program being analyzed,

You mean you've found a way to forcibly give a return statement the side
effect of modifying the algorithm it's just finished testing? I'd like
to see it.

> therefore the result of the analysis is different. If the result is
> NOT returned to the program being analyzed, then the behavior of the
> program is NOT changed,
<snip>

Who said anything about a program X calling WillHalt(X)?

Stewart. 

-- 
My e-mail is valid but not my primary mailbox, aside from its being the 
unfortunate victim of intensive mail-bombing at the moment.  Please keep 
replies on the 'group where everyone may benefit.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Clever hack or code abomination?
    ... Arnaud Delobelle wrote: ... (definition of "works" is unimportant). ... The algorithm is: ... If you reach "foo-20", ...
    (comp.lang.python)
  • Re: Solution to the halting Problem?
    ... Peter Olcott wrote: ... your WillHalt() tester is useless. ... >> And having an algorithm which produces absolutely no result ...
    (comp.lang.cpp)
  • Re: Halting Problem Final Conclusion
    ... Peter Olcott wrote: ... by an algorithm because there are much more problems ... possibly wrong, leads you nowhere. ... Michael Mueller ...
    (sci.logic)
  • Re: Halting Problem Final Conclusion
    ... Peter Olcott wrote: ... by an algorithm because there are much more problems ... possibly wrong, leads you nowhere. ... Michael Mueller ...
    (comp.theory)