Rocksolid Light

Welcome to novaBBS (click a section below)

mail  files  register  newsreader  groups  login

Message-ID:  

It is not every question that deserves an answer. -- Publilius Syrus


devel / comp.theory / Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ unlimited scalability ]

SubjectAuthor
* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transitionolcott
+* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMr Flibble
|`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
| +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionMr Flibble
| |`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
| | `- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMr Flibble
| `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMalcolm McLean
|  +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |+* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMalcolm McLean
|  ||`- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |+* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMike Terry
|  ||`- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  | `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |  `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMJeff Barnett
|  |   |+* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionRichard Damon
|  |   ||`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMalcolm McLean
|  |   || +- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMRichard Damon
|  |   || `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   ||  `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   ||   `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   ||    `- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   |`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   | `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMJeff Barnett
|  |   |  `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   |   +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionRichard Damon
|  |   |   |+* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionMr Flibble
|  |   |   ||`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |   || `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   |   ||  `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |   ||   +- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMRichard Damon
|  |   |   ||   `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   |   ||    +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |   ||    |`- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   |   ||    `- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |   |`- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMJeff Barnett
|  |   |   `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |    `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   |     `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |      `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   |       `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |        +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionRichard Damon
|  |   |        |`- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMalcolm McLean
|  |   |        `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   |         `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMalcolm McLean
|  |   |          +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   |          |`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          | +- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMRichard Damon
|  |   |          | `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   |          |  +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMJeff Barnett
|  |   |          |  |`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |  | `- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMJeff Barnett
|  |   |          |  `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionMr Flibble
|  |   |          |   +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMdklei...@gmail.com
|  |   |          |   |+* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   |          |   || `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||  +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMike Terry
|  |   |          |   ||  |+- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||  |`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMalcolm McLean
|  |   |          |   ||  | +- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||  | `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMike Terry
|  |   |          |   ||  |  +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||  |  |`- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMike Terry
|  |   |          |   ||  |  `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMalcolm McLean
|  |   |          |   ||  |   +- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||  |   +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMike Terry
|  |   |          |   ||  |   |`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ bolcott
|  |   |          |   ||  |   | `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMike Terry
|  |   |          |   ||  |   |  +- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||  |   |  +- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||  |   |  `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ bBen
|  |   |          |   ||  |   |   `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMike Terry
|  |   |          |   ||  |   |    `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ bBen
|  |   |          |   ||  |   |     +- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||  |   |     +- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMRichard Damon
|  |   |          |   ||  |   |     `- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMike Terry
|  |   |          |   ||  |   `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMJeff Barnett
|  |   |          |   ||  |    `- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||  `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ bBen
|  |   |          |   ||   +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||   |`- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ bBen
|  |   |          |   ||   `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||    +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMike Terry
|  |   |          |   ||    |`- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||    `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ bBen
|  |   |          |   ||     `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||      `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ bBen
|  |   |          |   ||       `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||        `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ bBen
|  |   |          |   ||         `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||          +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ bBen
|  |   |          |   ||          |`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||          | `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ bBen
|  |   |          |   ||          |  `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||          |   `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ bBen
|  |   |          |   ||          |    `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||          |     +* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMr Flibble
|  |   |          |   ||          |     |`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   ||          |     | `- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMMr Flibble
|  |   |          |   ||          |     `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ bBen
|  |   |          |   ||          `- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMRichard Damon
|  |   |          |   |`- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          |   +- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
|  |   |          |   `- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   |          `- Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  |   `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TMolcott
|  `* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionBen
`* Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition functionMikko

Pages:12345678
Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<yaednWiSKce0D-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32305&group=comp.theory#32305

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 12:15:21 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 12:15:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <87bkw37n1f.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Io-dnWGZncLBr-H_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87lev75zv6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<TpidnUev2PYi-eH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc>
<U8ydnRBPtq-gH-P_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220513171452.00007ddd@reddwarf.jmc>
<44CdnVIP0pbtEuP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<20220513180900.00003005@reddwarf.jmc>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <20220513180900.00003005@reddwarf.jmc>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <yaednWiSKce0D-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 93
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-oYYR9v56nR6pweTKW8N35i0NZHWT8R1Q+mzIQUwMENRVeEIUiWSAPTQIMKDgPGL1Trwi1qAzmqrlj9E!IBAkrRcBsphi1p758AZzqZ0Kt7DgPzaJ66TRnXY8EGO8t0nSZe3QdQ2sMWilMkml8/B02lXQuUU=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 5640
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 17:15 UTC

On 5/13/2022 12:09 PM, Mr Flibble wrote:
> On Fri, 13 May 2022 12:03:43 -0500
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>
>> On 5/13/2022 11:14 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>> On Fri, 13 May 2022 11:07:24 -0500
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 5/13/2022 7:38 AM, Mr Flibble wrote:
>>>>> On Fri, 13 May 2022 11:54:49 +0100
>>>>> Ben <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/12/2022 8:54 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 5/12/2022 7:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Its done see my new post.
>>>>>>>>>> Apart from the bug/typo it's a perfectly good way to
>>>>>>>>>> implement a TM tape. It's not a deque though.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think that it is a better way to implement a std::deque.
>>>>>>>> Better than what?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The complex mess of the conventional way to implement std::deque
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There are lots of ways to implement a deque and they
>>>>>>>> all have advantages and disadvantages.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If you get maximum
>>>>>>> (a) simplicity (b) speed and (c) minimum space what more could
>>>>>>> you want?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Correctness.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Of course, since you have not
>>>>>>>> implemented any of the deque interface, I can't tell what
>>>>>>>> method might be thinking of using. Other than it will
>>>>>>>> probably use two vectors.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> public:
>>>>>>> tape_element& front( ) { return Left.back(); }
>>>>>>> tape_element& back() { return Right.back(); }
>>>>>>> void pop_front() { Left.pop_back(); }
>>>>>>> void pop_back() { Right.pop_back(); }
>>>>>>> void push_front(tape_element& E) { Left.push_back(E); }
>>>>>>> void push_back(tape_element& E) { Right.push_back(E); }
>>>>>>> void reserve(unsigned int N)
>>>>>>> { Left.reserve(N); Right.reserve(N); }
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is not correct. Please read a book. Or at least write a
>>>>>> test program and compare with std::deque.
>>>>>
>>>>> Even if we ignore complexity requirements and element reference
>>>>> stability it is still wrong: what happens if `Left` is empty,
>>>>> `Right` is non-empty and `pop_front` is called? It simply does not
>>>>> conform to the std::deque interface.
>>>>>
>>>>> /Flibble
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Oh, now I see what Ben was saying.
>>>> Simply extend my definition of pop_front() to account for this.
>>>
>>> I will be interested to see how you account for this without
>>> introducing linear, O(n), complexity for that operation.
>>>
>>> /Flibble
>>>
>>
>> It requires linear, O(n), complexity for that operation.
>> Tape_Type never needs to do that.
>
> So your class isn't a better version of std::deque then because
> std::deque::pop_front() is constant time not linear. Feel free to
> apologize for your mistake.
>
> /Flibble
>

The reason that I asked for review was to verify that my version of
std::deque is always better. You found an exception to that claim.
That exception never applies to my use of Tape_Type.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<PrwfK.4943$x1Wf.3197@fx10.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32306&group=comp.theory#32306

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer01.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx10.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <87bkw37n1f.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Io-dnWGZncLBr-H_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87lev75zv6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<TpidnUev2PYi-eH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<zdmdnVjtirshHeP_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87zgjlxusg.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnU8P0pZjDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <44CdnU8P0pZjDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 87
Message-ID: <PrwfK.4943$x1Wf.3197@fx10.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 13:20:50 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 5196
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 13 May 2022 17:20 UTC

On 5/13/22 1:10 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/13/2022 11:27 AM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/13/2022 5:54 AM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/12/2022 8:54 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 5/12/2022 7:10 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Its done see my new post.
>>>>>>>> Apart from the bug/typo it's a perfectly good way to implement a TM
>>>>>>>> tape.  It's not a deque though.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think that it is a better way to implement a std::deque.
>>>>>> Better than what?
>>>>>
>>>>> The complex mess of the conventional way to implement std::deque
>>>>>
>>>>>> There are lots of ways to implement a deque and they
>>>>>> all have advantages and disadvantages.
>>>>>
>>>>> If you get maximum
>>>>> (a) simplicity (b) speed and (c) minimum space what more could you
>>>>> want?
>>>> Correctness.
>>>>
>>>>>> Of course, since you have not
>>>>>> implemented any of the deque interface, I can't tell what method
>>>>>> might
>>>>>> be thinking of using.  Other than it will probably use two vectors.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> public:
>>>>>     tape_element& front( )      { return Left.back();       }
>>>>>     tape_element& back()        { return Right.back();      }
>>>>>     void pop_front()                  { Left.pop_back();    }
>>>>>     void pop_back()                   { Right.pop_back();   }
>>>>>     void push_front(tape_element& E)  { Left.push_back(E);  }
>>>>>     void push_back(tape_element& E)   { Right.push_back(E); }
>>>>>     void reserve(unsigned int N)
>>>>>                        { Left.reserve(N); Right.reserve(N); }
>>>> This is not correct.  Please read a book.  Or at least write a test
>>>> program and compare with std::deque.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It is correct within this design:
>>>
>>> // Tape_Type implements a two-way Turing machine tape.
>>> // Right contains Tape_Head >= 0 values (right expansion)
>>> // Left  contains Tape_Head  < 0 values (left  expansion)
>>> //
>>> // Grows with Right.push_back() as Tape_Head increases above 0.
>>> // Grows with Left.push_back() as Tape_Head decreases below 0.
>>> //
>>> // Tape_Type has functionality very similar to std::deque
>>> // yet implements this functionality much more simply.
>>> // This saves time and space.
>>
>> For goodness sake, find out what a deque is and then test our code.  Do
>> you post in the hope that someone will point out all the bugs and the
>> tell you how to fit it?
>>
>
> The std::deque stuff was a side issue.

Then why did YOU insist that you were correct that your implementation
was "a better deque then the standard deque implementation"?

This shows that you are prone to make assertions with actual "proof"
that they are true, and that you are not a reliable source.

Yes, maybe for the sub-case of a Turing machine (which only needs to add
to the tape, and never actually needs to remove things from the tape) it
is faster than the standard deque, but has more "user" code to
implement, so isn't unconditionally simpler.

>
> The key issue is how it performs as Tape_Type compared to your
> std::string method.
>
> Tape_Type::reserve() may make mine much faster for you test code.
>

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32315&group=comp.theory#32315

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 19:45:34 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <87lev75zv6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<TpidnUev2PYi-eH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc>
<875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="9d7070da1378146bf8b2ebf4ad06ac0b";
logging-data="23228"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19Lq0Qrfs+ZMFgxpYjKyAj6rVKTc+k2pQY="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:N+UAOpNQkorIky9KRoISnS7+rgY=
sha1:lsk9T4ZisQalpGr8mk1UjZ4QUVQ=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.218da299024946adfc72.20220513194534BST.87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 13 May 2022 18:45 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
> some cases.

As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few seconds. Or
at least I sincerely hope they did. It's not hard to see that your code
was wrong.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32317&group=comp.theory#32317

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!rocksolid2!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 13:57:17 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 13:57:16 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <87lev75zv6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<TpidnUev2PYi-eH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 25
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-iKeYtN2r/kuWVHGX8e9l5ItacLuoePdGU4C97yVVDD6u5wwHE89KqQINyjll7hFSb2LTBn9pJ6+NfcW!HPLlpCkqAB+TpfjRQ8mCJlsIDN5wXELIxZ87T9v077nE9bTJa4BBJvKPKovjJf7S4n0hzIr5MzU=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2876
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 18:57 UTC

On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>> some cases.
>
> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few seconds. Or
> at least I sincerely hope they did. It's not hard to see that your code
> was wrong.
>

The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.

None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest of
the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I would go
for the simpler std::string version.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<TYxfK.2958$tTK.2462@fx97.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32319&group=comp.theory#32319

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx97.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <87lev75zv6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<TpidnUev2PYi-eH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 26
Message-ID: <TYxfK.2958$tTK.2462@fx97.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 15:04:22 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 2619
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 13 May 2022 19:04 UTC

On 5/13/22 2:57 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>> some cases.
>>
>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few seconds.  Or
>> at least I sincerely hope they did.  It's not hard to see that your code
>> was wrong.
>>
>
> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.

I thought you said your were an expert at Computer Science.

The deque is like a first year data structure.

>
> None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
> the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest of
> the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I would go
> for the simpler std::string version.
>

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32323&group=comp.theory#32323

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 20:12:33 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc>
<875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="9d7070da1378146bf8b2ebf4ad06ac0b";
logging-data="23228"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19HPyvTYa+AGC0ZxtNPiduiHdqMcHU15RQ="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:Hy4iPmPKaB33SM/Lmn6iCyOnOkw=
sha1:evHA3+ReYwgzaF6Bqrc0Em6yHLs=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.0e4a38ab6925d5f84259.20220513201233BST.871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 13 May 2022 19:12 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>> some cases.
>>
>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few seconds. Or
>> at least I sincerely hope they did. It's not hard to see that your code
>> was wrong.
>
> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.

I guessed as much. Yet you claimed to have done better than the teams
of experienced programmers who've worked on various C++ standard
libraries after writing only a few lines of code? That level of
delusion might lead someone to think they can solve the halting problem.

> None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
> the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest of
> the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I would go
> for the simpler std::string version.

Using reserve has no effect on the one test case I have for timing.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<5sidnRk5xOXeM-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32326&group=comp.theory#32326

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 14:15:15 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 14:15:14 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <87lev75zv6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<TpidnUev2PYi-eH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<TYxfK.2958$tTK.2462@fx97.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <TYxfK.2958$tTK.2462@fx97.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <5sidnRk5xOXeM-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 40
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-cYJOJfiLbi/Oev9VU2YXbIKSJhfgByimh0qs6/2q4eliH+mJfJEPnqK2hNTE+/+RPdBdAdgohI1r3Pw!NIeLCPJoGH5TvSzGFKnqwVVdFWWtlAICRi9AIgwcUQwnVkoGuNwR4MeGCX/vSRDlj2I7H+VOOPc=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3422
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 19:15 UTC

On 5/13/2022 2:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/13/22 2:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>>> some cases.
>>>
>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few seconds.  Or
>>> at least I sincerely hope they did.  It's not hard to see that your code
>>> was wrong.
>>>
>>
>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>
> I thought you said your were an expert at Computer Science.
>

I never said that. I am becoming an expert on the analytical foundations
of knowledge and epistemology, which includes correcting the errors in
the notions of analytical truth and provability.

> The deque is like a first year data structure.
>
>>
>> None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
>> the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest of
>> the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I would go
>> for the simpler std::string version.
>>
>

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<ibSdnZplz8XxLOP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32332&group=comp.theory#32332

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 14:28:44 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 14:28:43 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <ibSdnZplz8XxLOP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 43
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-Zbb9798qJ+P9rpwxMPP2Ou5Ioqun8VfCLZy4M2IMci81Ak/8JKxxm79ed7R+ZpOIV/maEKDTmNBC5lZ!/3w55lKwuyB+elVpx51yBYN7DFR1BxKtj03nZpylkZOKxEDycvI6SHjC3yDBiZ98Nz+58+teRuY=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3629
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 19:28 UTC

On 5/13/2022 2:12 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>>> some cases.
>>>
>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few seconds. Or
>>> at least I sincerely hope they did. It's not hard to see that your code
>>> was wrong.
>>
>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>
> I guessed as much. Yet you claimed to have done better than the teams
> of experienced programmers who've worked on various C++ standard
> libraries after writing only a few lines of code? That level of
> delusion might lead someone to think they can solve the halting problem.
>

None-the-less my version does perform better and is much simpler on the
operations that I need.

>> None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
>> the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest of
>> the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I would go
>> for the simpler std::string version.
>
> Using reserve has no effect on the one test case I have for timing.
>

What is the speed difference? It may be that yours is simply better than
mine. Faster, smaller and simpler is definiitely better, depending on
the test case coverage.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<6vyfK.4945$x1Wf.4347@fx10.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32334&group=comp.theory#32334

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx10.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <87lev75zv6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<TpidnUev2PYi-eH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<TYxfK.2958$tTK.2462@fx97.iad>
<5sidnRk5xOXeM-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <5sidnRk5xOXeM-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 65
Message-ID: <6vyfK.4945$x1Wf.4347@fx10.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 15:40:53 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 4216
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 13 May 2022 19:40 UTC

On 5/13/22 3:15 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/13/2022 2:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/13/22 2:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>>>> some cases.
>>>>
>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few
>>>> seconds.  Or
>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did.  It's not hard to see that your
>>>> code
>>>> was wrong.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>
>> I thought you said your were an expert at Computer Science.
>>
>
> I never said that. I am becoming an expert on the analytical foundations
> of knowledge and epistemology, which includes correcting the errors in
> the notions of analytical truth and provability.
>

But you have, isn't the criteria to understand your own proof:

>
> This proof can only be understood only by those having sufficient technical competence in:
> (a) software engineering (recognizing infinite recursion in C and x86 code)
> (b) the x86 programming language
> (c) the C programming language and
> (d) the details of how C is translated into x86 by the Microsoft C compilers.

So, the first item is sufficient technical competence, which would
include the basic builing blocks of software, like the deque.

Also, you claim to have the training to have gotten a computer degree,
except for a few non-technical courses you didn't take.

Thus, either your own proof is beyond your understand (which I think it
might actually be, which is why it has so many mistakes in it), or you
have just admitted that you aren't really competent as a programmer, and
thus ALL your claims about things being obvious, need to be taken with a
grain of salt.

This also explains why even dirt simple programming tasks take you so
long, you just don't have the programming background to do it at all
efficiently.

>> The deque is like a first year data structure.
>>
>>>
>>> None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
>>> the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest
>>> of the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I
>>> would go for the simpler std::string version.
>>>
>>
>
>

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<XM6dnUn-mqnWJeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32339&group=comp.theory#32339

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 14:58:03 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 14:58:02 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <87lev75zv6.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<TpidnUev2PYi-eH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<TYxfK.2958$tTK.2462@fx97.iad>
<5sidnRk5xOXeM-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6vyfK.4945$x1Wf.4347@fx10.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <6vyfK.4945$x1Wf.4347@fx10.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <XM6dnUn-mqnWJeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 73
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-KIQVPvKh2+kgOVQzXf1rgdJRGMKFWp/xv9oULK7B4Nvg3VqjcjJMymSio3YDgyaBtJ2Vk5ErPANT6e1!jWW/AiMGAcR4Ff0AskGthKlkApGbFAqMUmlDVkn/ldJh44mFu7PWUYztoAoL0yvQz5hwuimGZpc=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4597
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 19:58 UTC

On 5/13/2022 2:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/13/22 3:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/13/2022 2:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/13/22 2:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>>>>> some cases.
>>>>>
>>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few
>>>>> seconds.  Or
>>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did.  It's not hard to see that your
>>>>> code
>>>>> was wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>>
>>> I thought you said your were an expert at Computer Science.
>>>
>>
>> I never said that. I am becoming an expert on the analytical
>> foundations of knowledge and epistemology, which includes correcting
>> the errors in the notions of analytical truth and provability.
>>
>
> But you have, isn't the criteria to understand your own proof:
>
>>
>> This proof can only be understood only by those having sufficient
>> technical competence in:
>> (a) software engineering (recognizing infinite recursion in C and x86
>> code)
>> (b) the x86 programming language
>> (c) the C programming language and
>> (d) the details of how C is translated into x86 by the Microsoft C
>> compilers.
>
> So, the first item is sufficient technical competence,

The precisely listed categories.

> which would
> include the basic builing blocks of software, like the deque.
>

Not at all, only the precisely listed categories are needed.

> Also, you claim to have the training to have gotten a computer degree,
> except for a few non-technical courses you didn't take.
>

Credibility often proves to be a crappy measure of validity especially
for brand new insights.

It has been dead obvious that H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for
the input to H(P,P) on the basis of the actual behavior that this input
actually specifies.

This has been dead obvious on this basis for at least six months, yet
people very persistently insisted on simply ignoring the easily
verifiable facts for this whole six month period.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<C7zfK.24$NMxb.11@fx02.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32351&group=comp.theory#32351

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx02.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me>
<TpidnUev2PYi-eH_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<TYxfK.2958$tTK.2462@fx97.iad>
<5sidnRk5xOXeM-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6vyfK.4945$x1Wf.4347@fx10.iad>
<XM6dnUn-mqnWJeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <XM6dnUn-mqnWJeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 97
Message-ID: <C7zfK.24$NMxb.11@fx02.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 16:24:01 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 5549
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 13 May 2022 20:24 UTC

On 5/13/22 3:58 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/13/2022 2:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/13/22 3:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/13/2022 2:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/13/22 2:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than
>>>>>>> std::deque in
>>>>>>> some cases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few
>>>>>> seconds.  Or
>>>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did.  It's not hard to see that
>>>>>> your code
>>>>>> was wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>>>
>>>> I thought you said your were an expert at Computer Science.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I never said that. I am becoming an expert on the analytical
>>> foundations of knowledge and epistemology, which includes correcting
>>> the errors in the notions of analytical truth and provability.
>>>
>>
>> But you have, isn't the criteria to understand your own proof:
>>
>>>
>>> This proof can only be understood only by those having sufficient
>>> technical competence in:
>>> (a) software engineering (recognizing infinite recursion in C and x86
>>> code)
>>> (b) the x86 programming language
>>> (c) the C programming language and
>>> (d) the details of how C is translated into x86 by the Microsoft C
>>> compilers.
>>
>> So, the first item is sufficient technical competence,
>
> The precisely listed categories.
>
>>  which would include the basic builing blocks of software, like the
>> deque.
>>
>
> Not at all, only the precisely listed categories are needed.
>
>> Also, you claim to have the training to have gotten a computer degree,
>> except for a few non-technical courses you didn't take.
>>
>
> Credibility often proves to be a crappy measure of validity especially
> for brand new insights.
>
> It has been dead obvious that H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for
> the input to H(P,P) on the basis of the actual behavior that this input
> actually specifies.
>
> This has been dead obvious on this basis for at least six months, yet
> people very persistently insisted on simply ignoring the easily
> verifiable facts for this whole six month period.
>

It has been DEAD obvious for years that you don't actually understand
what you are saying and don't understand how any of this actually works.

If we can believe you, soon YOU will be dead, and we will be relieved of
having to show you your errors.

You clearly don't understand what it means for something to be true, or
provable.

You have shown that you have ZERO credibility behind anything that you
have said.

You claim great genius, but genius can break down its ideas to explain
to those with lesser understanding.

YOU just have delusions, which is shown by the fact that all you can do
is keep rephrasing the same problematic statements, but can't actually
break them done. All is base on it being 'obvious', but things that are
obvious, generally can be actually proved. (The number of fundamental
obvious assumptions that are used is tried to be kept to an absolute
minimum.)

One big problem to adding 'obvious' assumptions, is that every time you
do, you add the risk of making your system inconsistent, and proving
consistancy is something that often just can not be done. Which means
that by your definitions, you can't talk about is a system is
consistent, since that isn't often provable in the system, so it doesn't
have a truth value.

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<4KidnfSFNeUwXeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32355&group=comp.theory#32355

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 15:33:48 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 15:33:48 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<TYxfK.2958$tTK.2462@fx97.iad>
<5sidnRk5xOXeM-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6vyfK.4945$x1Wf.4347@fx10.iad>
<XM6dnUn-mqnWJeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <C7zfK.24$NMxb.11@fx02.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <C7zfK.24$NMxb.11@fx02.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <4KidnfSFNeUwXeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 83
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-8ZwPpgKu8mczFJpI3AYNTZm/u5GI8l1fYMsoml7ba0Zf1wcrmevWfJzCg2kUSEwuzknozDgo3t4AMGl!Rb6MSR1b9zgWpWYCuVnDlU2cSF24hWmmLX7wFbKoYSPdHnu+dZ9kkMl/HFBVWcTfCE3AeMyav/w=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 5195
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 20:33 UTC

On 5/13/2022 3:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/13/22 3:58 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/13/2022 2:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/13/22 3:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/13/2022 2:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 5/13/22 2:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than
>>>>>>>> std::deque in
>>>>>>>> some cases.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few
>>>>>>> seconds.  Or
>>>>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did.  It's not hard to see that
>>>>>>> your code
>>>>>>> was wrong.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> I thought you said your were an expert at Computer Science.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I never said that. I am becoming an expert on the analytical
>>>> foundations of knowledge and epistemology, which includes correcting
>>>> the errors in the notions of analytical truth and provability.
>>>>
>>>
>>> But you have, isn't the criteria to understand your own proof:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> This proof can only be understood only by those having sufficient
>>>> technical competence in:
>>>> (a) software engineering (recognizing infinite recursion in C and
>>>> x86 code)
>>>> (b) the x86 programming language
>>>> (c) the C programming language and
>>>> (d) the details of how C is translated into x86 by the Microsoft C
>>>> compilers.
>>>
>>> So, the first item is sufficient technical competence,
>>
>> The precisely listed categories.
>>
>>>  which would include the basic builing blocks of software, like the
>>> deque.
>>>
>>
>> Not at all, only the precisely listed categories are needed.
>>
>>> Also, you claim to have the training to have gotten a computer
>>> degree, except for a few non-technical courses you didn't take.
>>>
>>
>> Credibility often proves to be a crappy measure of validity especially
>> for brand new insights.
>>
>> It has been dead obvious that H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status for
>> the input to H(P,P) on the basis of the actual behavior that this
>> input actually specifies.
>>
>> This has been dead obvious on this basis for at least six months, yet
>> people very persistently insisted on simply ignoring the easily
>> verifiable facts for this whole six month period.
>>
>
> It has been DEAD obvious for years that you don't actually understand
> what you are saying and don't understand how any of this actually works.
H(P,P)==0 is proven to be correct empirically in that it does correctly
decide the halt status that its input specifies.

That is does not specify the halt status that you expect makes your
expectation incorrect.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<87fsldw3np.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32363&group=comp.theory#32363

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 21:58:34 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 45
Message-ID: <87fsldw3np.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc>
<875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<ibSdnZplz8XxLOP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="9d7070da1378146bf8b2ebf4ad06ac0b";
logging-data="3651"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX194R72ePsoyJPtVgYHjDh85YoiDfNUMjP4="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:4fMY00XQGwZ5g35YxhXes5rbd+8=
sha1:PqT8pn6OLU6eckk9AbHtHwUEncM=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.d314b8602694e333637d.20220513215834BST.87fsldw3np.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 13 May 2022 20:58 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/13/2022 2:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>>>> some cases.
>>>>
>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few seconds. Or
>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did. It's not hard to see that your code
>>>> was wrong.
>>>
>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>
>> I guessed as much. Yet you claimed to have done better than the teams
>> of experienced programmers who've worked on various C++ standard
>> libraries after writing only a few lines of code? That level of
>> delusion might lead someone to think they can solve the halting problem.
>
> None-the-less my version does perform better and is much simpler on
> the operations that I need.

What new delusion is this? Your "version" is not a deque. What is it a
version of? What does it perform better than?

>>> None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
>>> the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest of
>>> the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I would go
>>> for the simpler std::string version.
>>
>> Using reserve has no effect on the one test case I have for timing.
>
> What is the speed difference?

Not reliably measurable. I could do more robust tests but that's not
what I want to do today.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<t5mh9a$l6h$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32365&group=comp.theory#32365

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: jbb...@notatt.com (Jeff Barnett)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 15:06:44 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <t5mh9a$l6h$1@dont-email.me>
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Injection-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 21:06:50 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="27fa557f681bc88c52f09f4e76eb082a";
logging-data="21713"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/LMIfqv2xS6RYkSMCmT/vhl4IOYkVZmU0="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:oGw7eHu9yXsjFAXFByrknndE84k=
In-Reply-To: <871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: Jeff Barnett - Fri, 13 May 2022 21:06 UTC

On 5/13/2022 1:12 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>>> some cases.
>>>
>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few seconds. Or
>>> at least I sincerely hope they did. It's not hard to see that your code
>>> was wrong.
>>
>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>
> I guessed as much. Yet you claimed to have done better than the teams
> of experienced programmers who've worked on various C++ standard
> libraries after writing only a few lines of code? That level of
> delusion might lead someone to think they can solve the halting problem.
>
>> None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
>> the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest of
>> the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I would go
>> for the simpler std::string version.
>
> Using reserve has no effect on the one test case I have for timing.
Everyone as noted and/or commented on the fact that PO does not read all
that he cites or all that he criticizes. My conjecture is that he has a
learning disability that is manifest in his inability to stay focused on
or retain what he reads.

Take this TM implementation nonsense: a few years ago many of us
(including me) suggested TM testers and interpreters. He refused to use
them at that time and now is trying to implement one himself. I don't
think that it's for fun or curiosity. I think its because he cannot keep
several ideas in his head at the same time. And what is this nonsense
about rewriting part of the C library? I think that retaining enough of
the documentation to use the existing package is beyond his reading and
retaining abilities. So there is a desperate hope that he might be able
to learn it by doing. The problem is that he must fog the landscape with
obscurities to hide the display of his inabilities behind.

If you have a moment to reflect, see if this viewpoint explains some or
all of the exhibitions of the last few years to you. I'd be interested
in what you think.
--
Jeff Barnett

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<Kb2dnUS7ONJVVOP_nZ2dnUU7_81QAAAA@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32367&group=comp.theory#32367

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 16:12:40 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 16:12:39 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<ibSdnZplz8XxLOP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87fsldw3np.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87fsldw3np.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <Kb2dnUS7ONJVVOP_nZ2dnUU7_81QAAAA@giganews.com>
Lines: 55
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-Rsft33gsDMhNC/PqzpACg67n3TT6ErIYYPA6S582JJG9gQIhQ4bGgx+MGxE4h8L6vV1jhiQBC1dfQ5V!z7wwLHAaqd8X358mAYUm4h7YbAq7gTbwIyjBEy3I2DpKjWyM3L0aApTWfLP2D0NNxdzolCVIrqg=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4073
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 21:12 UTC

On 5/13/2022 3:58 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/13/2022 2:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>>>>> some cases.
>>>>>
>>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few seconds. Or
>>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did. It's not hard to see that your code
>>>>> was wrong.
>>>>
>>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>>
>>> I guessed as much. Yet you claimed to have done better than the teams
>>> of experienced programmers who've worked on various C++ standard
>>> libraries after writing only a few lines of code? That level of
>>> delusion might lead someone to think they can solve the halting problem.
>>
>> None-the-less my version does perform better and is much simpler on
>> the operations that I need.
>
> What new delusion is this? Your "version" is not a deque. What is it a
> version of? What does it perform better than?
>
>>>> None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
>>>> the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest of
>>>> the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I would go
>>>> for the simpler std::string version.
>>>
>>> Using reserve has no effect on the one test case I have for timing.
>>
>> What is the speed difference?
>
> Not reliably measurable. I could do more robust tests but that's not
> what I want to do today.
>

This always works well for me.
https://www.tutorialspoint.com/c_standard_library/c_function_clock.htm

I want to know if your version is better than mine.
When I am all done I want to have the best version.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<69mdnUv8GvgFV-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32369&group=comp.theory#32369

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 16:16:08 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 16:16:07 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t5mh9a$l6h$1@dont-email.me>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <t5mh9a$l6h$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <69mdnUv8GvgFV-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 62
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-vJc8JK18GPqcRXF74RxpdTeI6S17VGZ0nLVPu0lusNAOFhmj4o3nlzquk1hgtqS4vdcBop+uByY7GTD!63oiTxeDLjX1OIUi0jbElU3Q3c7sunQzvqIOCkTUMN7MvwP5gV2fMSXwVbsaUyAn0DQJM8IT3tY=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4860
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 21:16 UTC

On 5/13/2022 4:06 PM, Jeff Barnett wrote:
> On 5/13/2022 1:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>>>> some cases.
>>>>
>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few
>>>> seconds.  Or
>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did.  It's not hard to see that your
>>>> code
>>>> was wrong.
>>>
>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>
>> I guessed as much.  Yet you claimed to have done better than the teams
>> of experienced programmers who've worked on various C++ standard
>> libraries after writing only a few lines of code?  That level of
>> delusion might lead someone to think they can solve the halting problem.
>>
>>> None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
>>> the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest of
>>> the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I would go
>>> for the simpler std::string version.
>>
>> Using reserve has no effect on the one test case I have for timing.
> Everyone as noted and/or commented on the fact that PO does not read all
> that he cites or all that he criticizes. My conjecture is that he has a
> learning disability that is manifest in his inability to stay focused on
> or retain what he reads.
>
> Take this TM implementation nonsense: a few years ago many of us
> (including me) suggested TM testers and interpreters. He refused to use
> them at that time and now is trying to implement one himself. I don't
> think that it's for fun or curiosity. I think its because he cannot keep
> several ideas in his head at the same time. And what is this nonsense
> about rewriting part of the C library? I think that retaining enough of
> the documentation to use the existing package is beyond his reading and
> retaining abilities. So there is a desperate hope that he might be able
> to learn it by doing. The problem is that he must fog the landscape with
> obscurities to hide the display of his inabilities behind.
>
> If you have a moment to reflect, see if this viewpoint explains some or
> all of the exhibitions of the last few years to you. I'd be interested
> in what you think.

My original intent was to rewrite this to give it a three minute
learning curve. http://www.lns.mit.edu/~dsw/turing/turing.html

It is also useful for me to understand TM's better by writing one from
scratch.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<n1AfK.778$JXmb.251@fx03.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32374&group=comp.theory#32374

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!aioe.org!feeder1.feed.usenet.farm!feed.usenet.farm!tr1.eu1.usenetexpress.com!feeder.usenetexpress.com!tr2.iad1.usenetexpress.com!peer02.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx03.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <TYxfK.2958$tTK.2462@fx97.iad> <5sidnRk5xOXeM-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <6vyfK.4945$x1Wf.4347@fx10.iad> <XM6dnUn-mqnWJeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <C7zfK.24$NMxb.11@fx02.iad> <4KidnfSFNeUwXeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <4KidnfSFNeUwXeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 90
Message-ID: <n1AfK.778$JXmb.251@fx03.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 17:25:39 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 5242
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 13 May 2022 21:25 UTC

On 5/13/22 4:33 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/13/2022 3:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/13/22 3:58 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/13/2022 2:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/13/22 3:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/13/2022 2:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/13/22 2:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than
>>>>>>>>> std::deque in
>>>>>>>>> some cases.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few
>>>>>>>> seconds.  Or
>>>>>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did.  It's not hard to see that
>>>>>>>> your code
>>>>>>>> was wrong.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I thought you said your were an expert at Computer Science.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I never said that. I am becoming an expert on the analytical
>>>>> foundations of knowledge and epistemology, which includes
>>>>> correcting the errors in the notions of analytical truth and
>>>>> provability.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> But you have, isn't the criteria to understand your own proof:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This proof can only be understood only by those having sufficient
>>>>> technical competence in:
>>>>> (a) software engineering (recognizing infinite recursion in C and
>>>>> x86 code)
>>>>> (b) the x86 programming language
>>>>> (c) the C programming language and
>>>>> (d) the details of how C is translated into x86 by the Microsoft C
>>>>> compilers.
>>>>
>>>> So, the first item is sufficient technical competence,
>>>
>>> The precisely listed categories.
>>>
>>>>  which would include the basic builing blocks of software, like the
>>>> deque.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Not at all, only the precisely listed categories are needed.
>>>
>>>> Also, you claim to have the training to have gotten a computer
>>>> degree, except for a few non-technical courses you didn't take.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Credibility often proves to be a crappy measure of validity
>>> especially for brand new insights.
>>>
>>> It has been dead obvious that H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status
>>> for the input to H(P,P) on the basis of the actual behavior that this
>>> input actually specifies.
>>>
>>> This has been dead obvious on this basis for at least six months, yet
>>> people very persistently insisted on simply ignoring the easily
>>> verifiable facts for this whole six month period.
>>>
>>
>> It has been DEAD obvious for years that you don't actually understand
>> what you are saying and don't understand how any of this actually works.
> H(P,P)==0 is proven to be correct empirically in that it does correctly
> decide the halt status that its input specifies.
>
> That is does not specify the halt status that you expect makes your
> expectation incorrect.
>

Nope, just provesw that H (and you) are not using the REQUIERED criteria.

The "proof" that H is correct is incorrect based on the right
definitions of the terms, and only proves that you are not working on
the Halting Problem.

Note, you don't get to redefine the problem or claim it can't mean what
it says, THAT is invalid logic.

You are just proving you are a liar.

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ unlimited scalability ]

<I7qdnazqXcNoTeP_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32378&group=comp.theory#32378

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 16:43:17 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 16:43:16 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ unlimited scalability ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<ibSdnZplz8XxLOP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87fsldw3np.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87fsldw3np.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <I7qdnazqXcNoTeP_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 52
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-MphLOhOJBwtV65N1aHwxZUk6qP31q+W600aZSsL25TiCCYUzwfl0L/t+WrmNSSCf3Ng7l7V6hA/n+VS!Aj9OfyDABQWQgkjk6Ezb5CUaquuGGFCFxy9y2j4xbyssb6W3T/04zEj0uuuEZ0oenmxOkezwsn0=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 3998
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 21:43 UTC

On 5/13/2022 3:58 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/13/2022 2:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>>>>> some cases.
>>>>>
>>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few seconds. Or
>>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did. It's not hard to see that your code
>>>>> was wrong.
>>>>
>>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>>
>>> I guessed as much. Yet you claimed to have done better than the teams
>>> of experienced programmers who've worked on various C++ standard
>>> libraries after writing only a few lines of code? That level of
>>> delusion might lead someone to think they can solve the halting problem.
>>
>> None-the-less my version does perform better and is much simpler on
>> the operations that I need.
>
> What new delusion is this? Your "version" is not a deque. What is it a
> version of? What does it perform better than?
>
>>>> None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
>>>> the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest of
>>>> the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I would go
>>>> for the simpler std::string version.
>>>
>>> Using reserve has no effect on the one test case I have for timing.
>>
>> What is the speed difference?
>
> Not reliably measurable. I could do more robust tests but that's not
> what I want to do today.
>

In any case my design goal of unlimited scalability is met by my design.
This was also designed into my state transitions.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<FJWdnauuhYHeT-P_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32384&group=comp.theory#32384

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!weretis.net!feeder6.news.weretis.net!news.misty.com!border2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer2.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 16:48:51 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 16:48:50 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<TYxfK.2958$tTK.2462@fx97.iad>
<5sidnRk5xOXeM-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6vyfK.4945$x1Wf.4347@fx10.iad>
<XM6dnUn-mqnWJeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <C7zfK.24$NMxb.11@fx02.iad>
<4KidnfSFNeUwXeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <n1AfK.778$JXmb.251@fx03.iad>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <n1AfK.778$JXmb.251@fx03.iad>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Message-ID: <FJWdnauuhYHeT-P_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 106
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-NiggMrUj8stZCxvJ78Moh4WKrTgAxndyVLxRtMPReaooOCSGdoRStg+yzK3m4ymzIkc1Px6k9hqU1yC!yIhyx1CYejymdHL/0jp+2lHk0jgAAvNrVNAbJn+d2EaNKQlTO8jjFp2/V8hKDOe7ZPF3DOKcBhc=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 6294
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 21:48 UTC

On 5/13/2022 4:25 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
> On 5/13/22 4:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>> On 5/13/2022 3:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>> On 5/13/22 3:58 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>> On 5/13/2022 2:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>> On 5/13/22 3:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/13/2022 2:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/13/22 2:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>>>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than
>>>>>>>>>> std::deque in
>>>>>>>>>> some cases.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few
>>>>>>>>> seconds.  Or
>>>>>>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did.  It's not hard to see that
>>>>>>>>> your code
>>>>>>>>> was wrong.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I thought you said your were an expert at Computer Science.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I never said that. I am becoming an expert on the analytical
>>>>>> foundations of knowledge and epistemology, which includes
>>>>>> correcting the errors in the notions of analytical truth and
>>>>>> provability.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> But you have, isn't the criteria to understand your own proof:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This proof can only be understood only by those having sufficient
>>>>>> technical competence in:
>>>>>> (a) software engineering (recognizing infinite recursion in C and
>>>>>> x86 code)
>>>>>> (b) the x86 programming language
>>>>>> (c) the C programming language and
>>>>>> (d) the details of how C is translated into x86 by the Microsoft C
>>>>>> compilers.
>>>>>
>>>>> So, the first item is sufficient technical competence,
>>>>
>>>> The precisely listed categories.
>>>>
>>>>>  which would include the basic builing blocks of software, like the
>>>>> deque.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Not at all, only the precisely listed categories are needed.
>>>>
>>>>> Also, you claim to have the training to have gotten a computer
>>>>> degree, except for a few non-technical courses you didn't take.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Credibility often proves to be a crappy measure of validity
>>>> especially for brand new insights.
>>>>
>>>> It has been dead obvious that H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status
>>>> for the input to H(P,P) on the basis of the actual behavior that
>>>> this input actually specifies.
>>>>
>>>> This has been dead obvious on this basis for at least six months,
>>>> yet people very persistently insisted on simply ignoring the easily
>>>> verifiable facts for this whole six month period.
>>>>
>>>
>>> It has been DEAD obvious for years that you don't actually understand
>>> what you are saying and don't understand how any of this actually works.
>> H(P,P)==0 is proven to be correct empirically in that it does
>> correctly decide the halt status that its input specifies.
>>
>> That is does not specify the halt status that you expect makes your
>> expectation incorrect.
>>
>
> Nope, just provesw that H (and you) are not using the REQUIERED criteria.
>
> The "proof" that H is correct is incorrect based on the right
> definitions of the terms, and only proves that you are not working on
> the Halting Problem.
>

Tarski makes a similar mistake when he concludes that True() is not a
definable predicate entirely on the basis that he cannot prove that the
liar paradox is true. It never occurred to him that the liar paradox is
simply untrue.

That the definition of the halting problem criteria (in some rare cases)
directly contradicts the definition of a computer science decider that
requires all deciders to compute the mapping from their inputs
conclusively proves that the definition of the halting problem criteria
is incorrect in these (previously undiscovered) rare cases.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<ECAfK.1466$j0D5.823@fx09.iad>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32389&group=comp.theory#32389

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!peer03.iad!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!fx09.iad.POSTED!not-for-mail
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<TYxfK.2958$tTK.2462@fx97.iad>
<5sidnRk5xOXeM-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<6vyfK.4945$x1Wf.4347@fx10.iad>
<XM6dnUn-mqnWJeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <C7zfK.24$NMxb.11@fx02.iad>
<4KidnfSFNeUwXeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <n1AfK.778$JXmb.251@fx03.iad>
<FJWdnauuhYHeT-P_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
From: Rich...@Damon-Family.org (Richard Damon)
In-Reply-To: <FJWdnauuhYHeT-P_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 104
Message-ID: <ECAfK.1466$j0D5.823@fx09.iad>
X-Complaints-To: abuse@easynews.com
Organization: Forte - www.forteinc.com
X-Complaints-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly.
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 18:05:24 -0400
X-Received-Bytes: 6043
 by: Richard Damon - Fri, 13 May 2022 22:05 UTC

On 5/13/22 5:48 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/13/2022 4:25 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>> On 5/13/22 4:33 PM, olcott wrote:
>>> On 5/13/2022 3:24 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>> On 5/13/22 3:58 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>> On 5/13/2022 2:40 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>> On 5/13/22 3:15 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>> On 5/13/2022 2:04 PM, Richard Damon wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 5/13/22 2:57 PM, olcott wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>>>>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than
>>>>>>>>>>> std::deque in
>>>>>>>>>>> some cases.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few
>>>>>>>>>> seconds.  Or
>>>>>>>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did.  It's not hard to see that
>>>>>>>>>> your code
>>>>>>>>>> was wrong.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I thought you said your were an expert at Computer Science.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I never said that. I am becoming an expert on the analytical
>>>>>>> foundations of knowledge and epistemology, which includes
>>>>>>> correcting the errors in the notions of analytical truth and
>>>>>>> provability.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But you have, isn't the criteria to understand your own proof:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This proof can only be understood only by those having sufficient
>>>>>>> technical competence in:
>>>>>>> (a) software engineering (recognizing infinite recursion in C and
>>>>>>> x86 code)
>>>>>>> (b) the x86 programming language
>>>>>>> (c) the C programming language and
>>>>>>> (d) the details of how C is translated into x86 by the Microsoft
>>>>>>> C compilers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, the first item is sufficient technical competence,
>>>>>
>>>>> The precisely listed categories.
>>>>>
>>>>>>  which would include the basic builing blocks of software, like
>>>>>> the deque.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Not at all, only the precisely listed categories are needed.
>>>>>
>>>>>> Also, you claim to have the training to have gotten a computer
>>>>>> degree, except for a few non-technical courses you didn't take.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Credibility often proves to be a crappy measure of validity
>>>>> especially for brand new insights.
>>>>>
>>>>> It has been dead obvious that H(P,P)==0 is the correct halt status
>>>>> for the input to H(P,P) on the basis of the actual behavior that
>>>>> this input actually specifies.
>>>>>
>>>>> This has been dead obvious on this basis for at least six months,
>>>>> yet people very persistently insisted on simply ignoring the easily
>>>>> verifiable facts for this whole six month period.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It has been DEAD obvious for years that you don't actually
>>>> understand what you are saying and don't understand how any of this
>>>> actually works.
>>> H(P,P)==0 is proven to be correct empirically in that it does
>>> correctly decide the halt status that its input specifies.
>>>
>>> That is does not specify the halt status that you expect makes your
>>> expectation incorrect.
>>>
>>
>> Nope, just provesw that H (and you) are not using the REQUIERED criteria.
>>
>> The "proof" that H is correct is incorrect based on the right
>> definitions of the terms, and only proves that you are not working on
>> the Halting Problem.
>>
>
> Tarski makes a similar mistake when he concludes that True() is not a
> definable predicate entirely on the basis that he cannot prove that the
> liar paradox is true. It never occurred to him that the liar paradox is
> simply untrue.
>
> That the definition of the halting problem criteria (in some rare cases)
> directly contradicts the definition of a computer science decider that
> requires all deciders to compute the mapping from their inputs
> conclusively proves that the definition of the halting problem criteria
> is incorrect in these (previously undiscovered) rare cases.
>
>

Nope, your are just talking nonsense. See my other answer.

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<874k1tvy63.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32399&group=comp.theory#32399

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 23:57:08 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 60
Message-ID: <874k1tvy63.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc>
<875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<ibSdnZplz8XxLOP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsldw3np.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Kb2dnUS7ONJVVOP_nZ2dnUU7_81QAAAA@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="e15a6e7790c7684a121ff07a3ede6665";
logging-data="28271"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/DdhAaMlokVAkPCj+ETagpJv+O6vKMOPA="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:GEQp4WF1NqNuZjR5G2yf2vFHVtw=
sha1:tGdo5N8BDUaOqyFXNIHMV5obdho=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.b79ebee03ecf570e0b6d.20220513235708BST.874k1tvy63.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 13 May 2022 22:57 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> On 5/13/2022 3:58 PM, Ben wrote:
>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>
>>> On 5/13/2022 2:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>>>>>> some cases.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few seconds. Or
>>>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did. It's not hard to see that your code
>>>>>> was wrong.
>>>>>
>>>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>>>
>>>> I guessed as much. Yet you claimed to have done better than the teams
>>>> of experienced programmers who've worked on various C++ standard
>>>> libraries after writing only a few lines of code? That level of
>>>> delusion might lead someone to think they can solve the halting problem.
>>>
>>> None-the-less my version does perform better and is much simpler on
>>> the operations that I need.
>> What new delusion is this? Your "version" is not a deque. What is it a
>> version of? What does it perform better than?
>>
>>>>> None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
>>>>> the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest of
>>>>> the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I would go
>>>>> for the simpler std::string version.
>>>>
>>>> Using reserve has no effect on the one test case I have for timing.
>>>
>>> What is the speed difference?
>>
>> Not reliably measurable. I could do more robust tests but that's not
>> what I want to do today.
>
> This always works well for me.
> https://www.tutorialspoint.com/c_standard_library/c_function_clock.htm

It's not a method I like. When yours program is working, you can
do timings any way you like. (And since the code is C++ you might want
to look at std::chrono::high_resolution_clock.)

> I want to know if your version is better than mine.
> When I am all done I want to have the best version.

Well, it's better because it's finished. It may be worse in other ways,
but you don't say what "best" means to you.

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ unlimited scalability ]

<87y1z5ujip.fsf@bsb.me.uk>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32401&group=comp.theory#32401

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: ben.use...@bsb.me.uk (Ben)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ unlimited scalability ]
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 23:58:54 +0100
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <87y1z5ujip.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com>
<87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk> <20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc>
<875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
<87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
<871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<ibSdnZplz8XxLOP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
<87fsldw3np.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<I7qdnazqXcNoTeP_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="e15a6e7790c7684a121ff07a3ede6665";
logging-data="28271"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX180T7Sx2U3CuSOZq9q7kHC+7ChTE5uvzV0="
Cancel-Lock: sha1:pezL1yA4TwcXzTsfBVUoH/CWI1g=
sha1:ioKNdjJHZFgHXNysMxN9LGiyRDU=
X-BSB-Auth: 1.c951730a577f84c80b00.20220513235854BST.87y1z5ujip.fsf@bsb.me.uk
 by: Ben - Fri, 13 May 2022 22:58 UTC

olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:

> In any case my design goal of unlimited scalability is met by my design.
> This was also designed into my state transitions.

But it's not done yet. Something good now is better that perfect that
never arrives... Any ETA for working code that can run BB(5)?

--
Ben.
"le génie humain a des limites, quand la bêtise humaine n’en a pas"
Alexandre Dumas (fils)

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<zaWdnfcK_d13f-P_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32403&group=comp.theory#32403

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 17:59:54 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 17:59:53 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<ibSdnZplz8XxLOP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87fsldw3np.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<Kb2dnUS7ONJVVOP_nZ2dnUU7_81QAAAA@giganews.com> <874k1tvy63.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <874k1tvy63.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <zaWdnfcK_d13f-P_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 66
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-EIB7jJQXDgjqqe4dGxffEh7x1yHeTlK6NHL0XJpDfRrN4gUw1JuU8f3NwCmD+WTsn+QtidVXz15c0OZ!fiNCEvEe2vFdkWlZOOALhfQ6iKt4bKw7W1orgkFGwpmIRgjE4pRU1x0rGfhdTV237RkncJWP7/c=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 4639
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 22:59 UTC

On 5/13/2022 5:57 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> On 5/13/2022 3:58 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/13/2022 2:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>>>>>>> some cases.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few seconds. Or
>>>>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did. It's not hard to see that your code
>>>>>>> was wrong.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>>>>
>>>>> I guessed as much. Yet you claimed to have done better than the teams
>>>>> of experienced programmers who've worked on various C++ standard
>>>>> libraries after writing only a few lines of code? That level of
>>>>> delusion might lead someone to think they can solve the halting problem.
>>>>
>>>> None-the-less my version does perform better and is much simpler on
>>>> the operations that I need.
>>> What new delusion is this? Your "version" is not a deque. What is it a
>>> version of? What does it perform better than?
>>>
>>>>>> None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
>>>>>> the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest of
>>>>>> the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I would go
>>>>>> for the simpler std::string version.
>>>>>
>>>>> Using reserve has no effect on the one test case I have for timing.
>>>>
>>>> What is the speed difference?
>>>
>>> Not reliably measurable. I could do more robust tests but that's not
>>> what I want to do today.
>>
>> This always works well for me.
>> https://www.tutorialspoint.com/c_standard_library/c_function_clock.htm
>
> It's not a method I like. When yours program is working, you can
> do timings any way you like. (And since the code is C++ you might want
> to look at std::chrono::high_resolution_clock.)
>
>> I want to know if your version is better than mine.
>> When I am all done I want to have the best version.
>
> Well, it's better because it's finished. It may be worse in other ways,
> but you don't say what "best" means to you.
>

Mine is certainly designed to scale so on this basis I will keep mine.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ unlimited scalability ]

<zaWdnfEK_d00fuP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32406&group=comp.theory#32406

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!usenet.blueworldhosting.com!feed1.usenet.blueworldhosting.com!3.us.feeder.erje.net!feeder.erje.net!border1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.giganews.com!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 18:03:05 -0500
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 18:03:04 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 10.0; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ unlimited scalability ]
Content-Language: en-US
Newsgroups: comp.theory
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<ibSdnZplz8XxLOP_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87fsldw3np.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<I7qdnazqXcNoTeP_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5ujip.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
From: NoO...@NoWhere.com (olcott)
In-Reply-To: <87y1z5ujip.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <zaWdnfEK_d00fuP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com>
Lines: 18
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-fQg9EaDdrgPDs89k4nEbxA/+y8Y/Wdyhyp3ubzLrhgSIwcmeUB9e3yyIdCz16LmCry56zcj2lau/yCB!IhjPeAA/AQWjnXyKAf2guFx3bohmzQJMNqD+vGx49IgNe1wq4rbqRxRkfsxUnVBcpn1xn2mxjk8=
X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com
X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
X-Original-Bytes: 2554
 by: olcott - Fri, 13 May 2022 23:03 UTC

On 5/13/2022 5:58 PM, Ben wrote:
> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>
>> In any case my design goal of unlimited scalability is met by my design.
>> This was also designed into my state transitions.
>
> But it's not done yet. Something good now is better that perfect that
> never arrives... Any ETA for working code that can run BB(5)?
>

It is almost done. Very soon.

--
Copyright 2022 Pete Olcott

"Talent hits a target no one else can hit;
Genius hits a target no one else can see."
Arthur Schopenhauer

Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM transition function [ best tape ]

<t5mqo1$h5o$1@dont-email.me>

 copy mid

https://www.novabbs.com/devel/article-flat.php?id=32422&group=comp.theory#32422

 copy link   Newsgroups: comp.theory
Path: i2pn2.org!i2pn.org!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: jbb...@notatt.com (Jeff Barnett)
Newsgroups: comp.theory
Subject: Re: Validating that the implementation meets the spec for TM
transition function [ best tape ]
Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 17:48:12 -0600
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 54
Message-ID: <t5mqo1$h5o$1@dont-email.me>
References: <t541t8$upu$1@dont-email.me> <874k1v5xll.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2eOdnW7GpMwx6OH_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87y1z650gu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<XdadnZj8avjLteD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <875yma4i6b.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<oZadnf2QMLKV8uD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <87tu9u31nv.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<X9mdnVTySoUr5eD_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <874k1u2vc7.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<2e-dnTfLY8FJC-D_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87pmki1edk.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<MeOdncVeZaeHMOD_nZ2dnUU7_8xh4p2d@giganews.com> <87wneqyz6w.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<IsSdnaQ2qJzQWOD_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com> <87y1z5zoqu.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<20220513133840.0000732f@reddwarf.jmc> <875ym9z9et.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<44CdnUwP0pbxDeP_nZ2dnUU7_81g4p2d@giganews.com> <87ilq9xodt.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<OdqdnRWhpOuQN-P_nZ2dnUU7_8zNnZ2d@giganews.com> <871qwxxn4u.fsf@bsb.me.uk>
<t5mh9a$l6h$1@dont-email.me> <69mdnUv8GvgFV-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
Injection-Date: Fri, 13 May 2022 23:48:17 -0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="0008a1c4b2ad15a2770c393bfa3f9d71";
logging-data="17592"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1+YXc+wnI0busiSEbjUjhdZzIWHw1rknGw="
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; Win64; x64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101
Thunderbird/91.9.0
Cancel-Lock: sha1:g+RdznG4TMl8c6J0H9mC+TSEJFw=
In-Reply-To: <69mdnUv8GvgFV-P_nZ2dnUU7_83NnZ2d@giganews.com>
Content-Language: en-US
 by: Jeff Barnett - Fri, 13 May 2022 23:48 UTC

On 5/13/2022 3:16 PM, olcott wrote:
> On 5/13/2022 4:06 PM, Jeff Barnett wrote:
>> On 5/13/2022 1:12 PM, Ben wrote:
>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>
>>>> On 5/13/2022 1:45 PM, Ben wrote:
>>>>> olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com> writes:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Flibble found a case where my member functions would need to be
>>>>>> extended and this extension may have a worse Big-O than std::deque in
>>>>>> some cases.
>>>>>
>>>>> As did everyone who glanced at the code for more than a few
>>>>> seconds.  Or
>>>>> at least I sincerely hope they did.  It's not hard to see that your
>>>>> code
>>>>> was wrong.
>>>>
>>>> The details of std::deque is almost brand new to me.
>>>
>>> I guessed as much.  Yet you claimed to have done better than the teams
>>> of experienced programmers who've worked on various C++ standard
>>> libraries after writing only a few lines of code?  That level of
>>> delusion might lead someone to think they can solve the halting problem.
>>>
>>>> None-the-less my Tape_Type does seem optimal for a TM tape as long as
>>>> the speed with Tape_Type::reserve() beats some and matches the rest of
>>>> the speed of every operation of your std::string, otherwise I would go
>>>> for the simpler std::string version.
>>>
>>> Using reserve has no effect on the one test case I have for timing.
>> Everyone as noted and/or commented on the fact that PO does not read
>> all that he cites or all that he criticizes. My conjecture is that he
>> has a learning disability that is manifest in his inability to stay
>> focused on or retain what he reads.
>>
>> Take this TM implementation nonsense: a few years ago many of us
>> (including me) suggested TM testers and interpreters. He refused to
>> use them at that time and now is trying to implement one himself. I
>> don't think that it's for fun or curiosity. I think its because he
>> cannot keep several ideas in his head at the same time. And what is
>> this nonsense about rewriting part of the C library? I think that
>> retaining enough of the documentation to use the existing package is
>> beyond his reading and retaining abilities. So there is a desperate
>> hope that he might be able to learn it by doing. The problem is that
>> he must fog the landscape with obscurities to hide the display of his
>> inabilities behind.
>>
>> If you have a moment to reflect, see if this viewpoint explains some
>> or all of the exhibitions of the last few years to you. I'd be
>> interested in what you think.
>
> My original intent was to rewrite this to give it a three minute
> learning curve. http://www.lns.mit.edu/~dsw/turing/turing.html
>
> It is also useful for me to understand TM's better by writing one from
> scratch.
And what did you learn by badly miscoding part of the C library? <-
that's a sarcastic question mark.
--
Jeff Barnett

Pages:12345678
server_pubkey.txt

rocksolid light 0.9.7
clearnet tor