
Sign up to save your podcasts
Or
I discuss what is called the locally nameless representation of syntax with binders, following the first couple of sections of the very nicely written paper "The Locally Nameless Representation," by Charguéraud. I complain due to the statement in the paper that "the theory of λ-calculus identifies terms that are α-equivalent," which is simply not true if one is considering lambda calculus as defined by Church, where renaming is an explicit reduction step, on a par with beta-reduction. I also answer a listener's question about what "computational type theory" means.
Feel free to email me any time at [email protected], or join the Telegram group for the podcast.
5
1717 ratings
I discuss what is called the locally nameless representation of syntax with binders, following the first couple of sections of the very nicely written paper "The Locally Nameless Representation," by Charguéraud. I complain due to the statement in the paper that "the theory of λ-calculus identifies terms that are α-equivalent," which is simply not true if one is considering lambda calculus as defined by Church, where renaming is an explicit reduction step, on a par with beta-reduction. I also answer a listener's question about what "computational type theory" means.
Feel free to email me any time at [email protected], or join the Telegram group for the podcast.
272 Listeners
90,559 Listeners
30,950 Listeners
108 Listeners
4,123 Listeners
31 Listeners
15,321 Listeners
34 Listeners
11 Listeners
10,249 Listeners
3,133 Listeners
47 Listeners
21 Listeners