From Newsgroup: comp.lang.c
On 11/22/2025 11:56 AM, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
On 2025-11-22, olcott <polcott333@gmail.com> 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.
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.
The reason that I call you a damned liar and not
just an ordinary liar is that damned lies against
my reasoning keep postponing making truth computable.
This continues to let dangerous liars get away with
their dangerous lies. Thus your silly trollish head
games might actually result in the end of life on Earth.
The world may be plunged in nuclear Winter just
because people believe that Putin's land grab is
not mere theft. If truth would have been computable
five years ago we might not even be on this
dangerous precipice.
Functions do not have differences in behavior based
on what name is being used to refer to them.
You have a bug there.
A guy that is smart enough to do this
https://www.nongnu.org/txr/txr-manpage.html#N-CF27E2FE
... is not you, even by a long shot.
--
Copyright 2025 Olcott
My 28 year goal has been to make
"true on the basis of meaning" computable.
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2