Ezra Cooper e...@ezrakilty.net wrote:
I believe this to be a general trait of things described as
calculi--that they have some form of name-binders, but I have never
seen that observation written down.
Combinator calculi are a counter-example.
Tony.
--
f.anthony.n.finch d...@dotat.at
On Wed, 2011-08-24 at 14:01 +0100, Tony Finch wrote:
Ezra Cooper e...@ezrakilty.net wrote:
I believe this to be a general trait of things described as
calculi--that they have some form of name-binders, but I have never
seen that observation written down.
Combinator calculi are a
It's always been my understanding that calculi were systems that defined
particular symbols and the legal methods of their manipulation in the context
of a particular calculus. The point, generally (har har), seems to be
abstraction. The lambda calculus describes computation without actually
Slight digression. Why not Lambda Algebra?
In particular, what is the criteria for a system to be calculus and how's it
different from algebra?
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 12:41 AM, Jack Henahan jhena...@uvm.edu wrote:
The short answer is because Church said so. But yes, it is basically
because λ
See Serge Lang's Algebra.
2011/8/23 Rajesh S R srrajesh1...@gmail.com:
Slight digression. Why not Lambda Algebra?
In particular, what is the criteria for a system to be calculus and how's it
different from algebra?
--
--
Regards,
KC
___
An algebra is a specific kind of structure which is itself formalized
mathematically. I've never seen a formalization of the notion of a calculus
and I believe it to be a looser term, as KC defined it.
Specifically, an algebra consists of a set (or several sorts of sets) and
operations that
Definition of calculus
a : a method of computation or calculation in a special notation (as
of logic or symbolic logic)
b : the mathematical methods comprising differential and integral
calculus —often used with the
So a calculus means more than differentiation and integration it can
also mean
KC kc1...@gmail.com wrote:
Lambda abstraction was probably chosen in case someone found better
abstractions; e.g. epsilon, delta, gamma, beta, alpha, ... :)
http://www-maths.swan.ac.uk/staff/jrh/papers/JRHHislamWeb.pdf
Page 7:
By the way, why did Church choose the notation λ? In [an
I had thyroid cancer a few years ago; now I've lost my sense of tumour. :)
--
--
Regards,
KC
___
Haskell-Cafe mailing list
Haskell-Cafe@haskell.org
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe
The short answer is because Church said so. But yes, it is basically because
λ is the abstraction operator in the calculus.
Why not alpha or beta calculus? What would we call alpha and beta conversion,
then? :D
On Aug 21, 2011, at 12:37 PM, C K Kashyap wrote:
Hi,
Can someone please tell me
IIRC Church found it easy to write on paper.
On 21 August 2011 21:11, Jack Henahan jhena...@uvm.edu wrote:
The short answer is because Church said so. But yes, it is basically
because λ is the abstraction operator in the calculus.
Why not alpha or beta calculus? What would we call alpha and
From Cardone, Hindley History of Lambda-calculus and
Combinatory Logic[1]:
(By the way, why did Church choose the notation “λ”? In [Church,
1964, §2] he stated clearly that it came from the notation “ˆ x” used
for class-abstraction by Whitehead and Russell, by first modifying “ˆ
x” to “∧x” to
12 matches
Mail list logo
