In the SEP article on supertasks, it states that:
Max Black (1950) argued that it is nevertheless impossible to complete the Zeno task, since there is no final step in the infinite sequence. The existence of a final step was similarly demanded on a priori terms by Gwiazda (2012). But as Thomson (1954) and Earman and Norton (1996) have pointed out, there is a sense in which this objection equivocates on two different meanings of the word “complete.” On the one hand “complete” can refer to the execution of a final action. This sense of completion does not occur in Zeno’s Dichotomy, since for every step in the task there is another step that happens later. On the other hand, “complete” can refer to carrying out every step in the task, which certainly does occur in Zeno’s Dichotomy. From Black’s argument one can see that the Zeno Dichotomy cannot be completed in the first sense. But it can be completed in the second. The two meanings for the word “complete” happen to be equivalent for finite tasks, where most of our intuitions about tasks are developed. But they are not equivalent when it comes to supertasks.
The question is a relatively simple one, that being, if the journey is from point A to point B, and the completion of the journey entails reaching point B by traveling point by point, how can one complete "every step" if reaching point B is one of the steps (as the reaching of point B would be a "final action")? In what sense can you posit completion of all the steps if it does not include the crossing of the point that signifies completion?