Talk:Iterate/Turing-completeness proof

hmm... something's gone wrong. the page for BCT shows the execution of the program as:

Commands    
Executed   Data-string
--------   -------------
  10       1
  11       10
  11       101
   0       1011
* 11        011
  10        011
   0        011
* 11         11
  10         111
  11         1110
   0         11101
* 10          1101
  11          11010  <--- !!
  11          110101
   0          1101011
* 11           101011
  10           1010111
   0           10101110
* 11            0101110
  10            0101110
  11            0101110
   0            0101110 
* 10             101110

yet, the implementation lists this sequence:

10111101110011101100 1
11110111001110110010 10
11011100111011001011 101
01110011101100101111 1011
11100111011001011110 011
10011101100101111011 011
01110110010111101110 011
11101100101111011100 11
10110010111101110011 111
11001011110111001110 1110
00101111011100111011 11101
01011110111001110110 1101
10111101110011101100 101    <-- right here
11110111001110110010 1010
11011100111011001011 10101
01110011101100101111 101011
11100111011001011110 01011
10011101100101111011 01011
01110110010111101110 01011
11101100101111011100 1011
10110010111101110011 10111
11001011110111001110 101110
00101111011100111011 1011101
01011110111001110110 011101
10111101110011101100 11101
11110111001110110010 111010
11011100111011001011 1110101

I'm not sure if it's an issue with my implementation or the breakdown on the page. any help? (I'd try to debug it myself, but it takes an arduously long time when running normally already, mainly since it has to run like 226237 or 524288 index loops; the stream seems to look okay anwyays) —aadenboy (talk|contribs) 19:50, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

I think you have an extra zero / empty production at the end of the translated program, so its a bug in your BCT program, not the interpreter or language:

   10111101110011101100 1

should be

   1011110111001110110 1
   .0.1.1|.1.0|.1.0.1|   <-- breakdown showing original CT productions

(I could be wrong, I'm static debugging BCT by eye ;) ) Salpynx (talk) 20:41, 7 October 2025 (UTC)

ah, yep, that seems to be the issue! I didn't catch that since I have to store the length separately as a power of two, and I set it one bit too high. it's working correctly now, thanks! —aadenboy (talk|contribs) 20:51, 7 October 2025 (UTC)