Sysop: | Amessyroom |
---|---|
Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
Users: | 23 |
Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
Uptime: | 40:50:58 |
Calls: | 583 |
Calls today: | 1 |
Files: | 1,138 |
Messages: | 110,394 |
This topic relates to how much you know about programs and prove the C/C++ codes is (logically) correct.
This topic relates to how much you know about programs and prove the C/C++ codes is (logically) correct.
Am 25.08.2025 um 16:27 schrieb wij:
This topic relates to how much you know about programs and prove the C/C++ codes is (logically) correct.
The halting problem is simple to solve:Halting Problem is about Turing Machine, But you can use, for example,
jthread( []
{
this_thread::sleep_for( 1h );
abort();
} ).detach();
Each program that uses this halts at least in an hour.
Aren't I a genius ? I'll get the Turing Award for that !
On 25/08/2025 15:27, wij wrote:
This topic relates to how much you know about programs and prove the C/C++ codes is (logically) correct.
In order to demonstrate your understanding of the halting problem,Yes, it is about C/C++.
please summarise it for us. If you are unable to do so, please take the discussion elsewhere. So far, this discussion has had nothing to do with C/C++.
On Mon, 2025-08-25 at 16:47 +0200, Bonita Montero wrote:
Am 25.08.2025 um 16:27 schrieb wij:
This topic relates to how much you know about programs and prove the C/C++ >>> codes is (logically) correct.
The halting problem is simple to solve:
jthread( []
{
this_thread::sleep_for( 1h );
abort();
} ).detach();
Each program that uses this halts at least in an hour.
Aren't I a genius ? I'll get the Turing Award for that !
Halting Problem is about Turing Machine, But you can use, for example,
a 'function', or an executable,...,others.
You just prove you are another olcott who deos not know what HP is.
But in your case, how do you prove 'jthread' is correct?
I guess you have no idea!
On 25/08/2025 16:10, wij wrote:The idea was just inspired by olcott. Halting Problem should be simple and
I guess you have no idea!
We rely on you to explain things to us in a simple way. As Albert
Einstein once said, 'If you can't explain it simply, you don't
understand it well enough'.
Given your extensive knowledge of C/C++ and halting problems, please summarise it for us here.
On Mon, 2025-08-25 at 15:51 +0000, Gerald Tubin wrote:
On 25/08/2025 16:10, wij wrote:
I guess you have no idea!
We rely on you to explain things to us in a simple way. As Albert
Einstein once said, 'If you can't explain it simply, you don't
understand it well enough'.
Given your extensive knowledge of C/C++ and halting problems, please
summarise it for us here.
The idea was just inspired by olcott. Halting Problem should be simple and does not involve too many stuff. Detail of the rule I can think about now is:
1. The correctness of C/C++ codes is based Turing Machine.
(otherwise, no way to verify. Or, you porved Church-Turing thesis is wrong)
2. C++std library does not prove itself correct, the proof generally cannot
relies on it (except you can prove it. Some primative things should be OK).
3. xxx are correct iff it can be implemented by Turing Machine. But normally we
don't need to go that deep. In some cases, specification is fine if it can
be correctly assumed correct.
On 25/08/2025 16:10, wij wrote:
I guess you have no idea!
We rely on you to explain things to us in a simple way. As Albert
Einstein once said, 'If you can't explain it simply, you don't
understand it well enough'.
Given your extensive knowledge of C/C++ and halting problems, please summarise it for us here.