For every computable program transformer, some program has the same behavior as its transformed version. The example is deliberately concrete; it is a test of the statement, not a substitute for it.
Definitions first
A decision problem is computable when a Turing machine \(M_e(x)\) halts on every input with the correct answer. A set \(A\subseteq\mathbf N\) is computably enumerable when a machine can list its members.
The typography mirrors the proof: first declare \(\mathsf D\), then state \(\mathsf C\). The symbol \(\Longrightarrow\) below is a logical dependency, not extra mathematical structure.
A small case in full
The following line is the smallest calculation that still exercises the mechanism. It keeps nested delimiters and the order of operations explicit.
The reusable statement
A good test for understanding is to change the presentation while keeping the invariant fixed. The aligned form makes that comparison unusually easy.
A nearby false statement
Enumerability is weaker than decidability. A search may confirm membership eventually without ever certifying nonmembership.
I would use the boxed line as a reference later, while returning to the full display whenever a hypothesis becomes uncertain. That division keeps compression from becoming ambiguity.