Le 10-nov.-06, à 05:53, Colin Geoffrey Hales a écrit :
> The brackets I have used to date are not the brackets of the lambda > calculus. I think physically, not symbolically. I find the jargon > really > hard to relate to. I thought you were referring to Alonzo Church's original book on "lambda conversion". Why do you want use the lambda calculus if you don't want use its "jargon"? The advantage of using some very well known formalism (like LAMBDA, or the combinators) is that you can directly refer to well known theorem in the literature. Of course you have too familiarize yourself with a bit of technical jargon, but lambda calculus is a technical matter, so this was expectable. Perhaps you could use a popular functional programming language like LISP, before moving to the more technical lambda? Bruno http://iridia.ulb.ac.be/~marchal/ --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To post to this group, send email to everything-list@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
