- neonumeric - C++ arbitrary precision arithmetic library - 10 Updates
- OT: Help to disprove this theory - 5 Updates
- Detecting infinite recursion (pathological self-reference error) - 1 Update
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: Mar 06 03:52PM +0100 > It hasn't been formally released yet as it still requires more extensive > testing. It will be used as part of my universal compiler, neos, that > can compile any programming language ... You will get the same room in the same psychiatric ward like Amine Moulay Ramdane. |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.REMOVETHISBIT.co.uk>: Mar 06 04:25PM On 06/03/2021 14:52, Bonita Montero wrote: >> compile any programming language ... > You will get the same room in the same psychiatric ward like > Amine Moulay Ramdane. Whilst you need to read the following: * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect /Flibble -- π |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: Mar 06 06:49PM +0100 > Whilst you need to read the following: > * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychological_projection > * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E2%80%93Kruger_effect There is no projection. _You_ have megalomania, not me. And there's also no Dunning Kruger effect. You can't assess your capabilites, not me. |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.REMOVETHISBIT.co.uk>: Mar 06 06:09PM On 06/03/2021 17:49, Bonita Montero wrote: > _You_ have megalomania, not me. > And there's also no Dunning Kruger effect. > You can't assess your capabilites, not me. no u -- π |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: Mar 06 08:11PM +0100 >> And there's also no Dunning Kruger effect. >> You can't assess your capabilites, not me. > no u Someone who says that he is capable of writing a compiler that translates every language has megalomania. No one can do this. |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.REMOVETHISBIT.co.uk>: Mar 06 07:35PM On 06/03/2021 19:11, Bonita Montero wrote: >> no u > Someone who says that he is capable of writing a compiler that > translates every language has megalomania. No one can do this. Just because you can't make one it doesn't follow that nobody else can. /Flibble -- π |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: Mar 06 01:16PM -0800 On 3/6/2021 11:35 AM, Mr Flibble wrote: >> Someone who says that he is capable of writing a compiler that >> translates every language has megalomania. No one can do this. > Just because you can't make one it doesn't follow that nobody else can. I remember when Bonita tried to convince me that a mutex must use an atomic counter. |
| Ben Bacarisse <ben.usenet@bsb.me.uk>: Mar 06 09:24PM >> translates every language has megalomania. No one can do this. > Just because you can't make one it doesn't follow that nobody else > can. True, but lots of very knowledgeable people have tried and failed. And although you use the present tense "my universal compiler, neos, that /can/ compile any programming language" (emphasis mine) you currently have nothing to show -- no compiler for any language, no paper outlining how you plan to overcome the problems that stumped others, nothing but what appears to be a false claim about neos can do. If you want this project to be taken seriously, you are going about it the wrong way. -- Ben. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: Mar 06 02:13PM -0800 On 3/5/2021 8:51 AM, Mr Flibble wrote: > can compile any programming language and will be used for the neos > implementation of Python (Python has big integers). > Message ends. Get atan2, cos and sin, and I have some code to run it against. https://github.com/ChrisMThomasson/fractal_cipher/blob/master/RIFC/cpp/ct_rifc_sample.cpp It needs arbitrary precision! :^) |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.REMOVETHISBIT.co.uk>: Mar 06 10:39PM On 06/03/2021 21:24, Ben Bacarisse wrote: > how you plan to overcome the problems that stumped others, nothing but > what appears to be a false claim about neos can do. If you want this > project to be taken seriously, you are going about it the wrong way. Not "wrong way", "my way". /Flibble -- π |
| Chris Vine <chris@cvine--nospam--.freeserve.co.uk>: Mar 05 11:38PM On Fri, 5 Mar 2021 17:48:44 -0500 "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> wrote: [snip] > I look forward to seeing what people come up with to disprove this > theory. It may still be wrong. But so far as I'm aware today, it has > not been disproven. It is crackpot, it is not a "theory", and you have no evidence to support it. Even if it were a plausible conjecture, it is not for others to disprove it. It is for you to prove it. However, some things are so ridiculous that all you can do is laugh. Actually, associating Christianity with this nonsense is I think borderline blasphemous. |
| Keith Thompson <Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com>: Mar 05 04:56PM -0800 > On Fri, 5 Mar 2021 15:31:38 -0500 > "Rick C. Hodgin" <rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com> wrote: > [snip] [...] > Also, sticking "OT" in the header doesn't mean it is OK to post your > off topic nonsense. Nor is it OK to reply to it. Please stop. -- Keith Thompson (The_Other_Keith) Keith.S.Thompson+u@gmail.com Working, but not speaking, for Philips Healthcare void Void(void) { Void(); } /* The recursive call of the void */ |
| Mr Flibble <flibble@i42.REMOVETHISBIT.co.uk>: Mar 06 01:10AM On 05/03/2021 20:31, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > Now, Leigh, this is a theory. I could be wrong. I'm looking for > something to disprove it. Claims of millions or billions of years also > theory. They do not disprove it. No, theories attempt to explain observations, facts and evidence: your "theory" has none of that, making it a hypothesis at best except the difference between your hypothesis and most others is that yours doesn't even pass the first gate that of course being Occam's Razor. /Flibble -- π |
| Bonita Montero <Bonita.Montero@gmail.com>: Mar 06 08:07AM +0100 >> Can you please post your thoughts where they are appropriate ? > I marked it Off-Topic. Too much reality for you? Can't handle it? You know that such postings aren't welcome here. |
| "Chris M. Thomasson" <chris.m.thomasson.1@gmail.com>: Mar 06 01:08PM -0800 On 3/4/2021 8:42 AM, Rick C. Hodgin wrote: > Do you know of anyone who can disprove this theory either > scientifically or Biblically? > https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oGdVtSh4wRs [...] Lets assume you are correct... Therefore, this must of happened in a sea of other solar systems in the universe. Right? |
| olcott <NoOne@NoWhere.com>: Mar 06 09:58AM -0600 On 3/6/2021 9:12 AM, Richard Damon wrote: >> If Halts((u32)H_Hat, (u32)H_Hat) returns false to H_Hat() meaning that >> its input halts, H_Hat() halts making false the wrong return value. > Yes, So Halts gets the answer wrong, but there is a answer. Because neither return value from the entire solution set of true/false is correct the decision problem is incorrect. > Which isn't the question to the classical Turing Problem, so is > meaningless to say anything about the proofs of the impossiblity to > universally solve the Classical Halting Problem. As soon as the pathological self-reference error is eliminated from the decision problem the corrected decision problem can be decided. -- Copyright 2021 Pete Olcott "Great spirits have always encountered violent opposition from mediocre minds." Einstein |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to comp.lang.c+++unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No comments:
Post a Comment