
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.
271 Listeners
90,558 Listeners
30,676 Listeners
106 Listeners
4,115 Listeners
35 Listeners
15,513 Listeners
35 Listeners
13 Listeners
10,628 Listeners
3,036 Listeners
58 Listeners
29 Listeners