Pinned toot

"Computers are rocks we tricked into thinking" is entirely incorrect. Computers are rocks we tricked ourselves into believing they could think

Pinned toot

I'm looking at the set of slides titled "Functional programming in other languages" and the example they use is PYTHON
How much influence can I impose on the prof to at least mention that the Racket they've been using all along in the intro course

Show thread

Looking at last year's schedule, it looks like the first month about covers all the functional programming features we've been using in the PL course (which uses Racket)
It's just kinda weird that on one hand you'd need a month to cover all this stuff that we half expect the PL course students to be comfortable with, and that on the other hand we expect them to be comfortable with functional concepts that take a month to teach in the FP course

Show thread

🎉 I'll be TAing a Haskell course next term 🎉

I apparently have forgotten how to write proofs that don't look like they should be typed into a proof assistant

Show thread

(\x:(!P or Q). case x of [y:!P => \p:P. explode (y p)] [y:Q => \p:P. Q]) : (!P or Q) -> (P -> Q)
I think going the other way requires LEM so that breaks the connection these things have with each other

Show thread

If (!P or Q) is classically equivalent to (P -> Q) and (P -> Q) is the nondependent version of (forall x:P. Q(x)), what's the relation between (!P or Q) and (forall x:P. Q(x))

That stuff is reserved for social media imo, it's the whole point

Show thread

I mean I do spend a good chunk of time doing my own things, but it seems absurd to mention Pokemon Go or that tasteless coffee cake I made or the latest book I read in a meeting

Show thread

Thinking about that time in a meeting after I mentioned the work I did that week someone asked me what about aside from work? and I was like aside... from work... ??

I mean how hard could it be to pick it up, I already know a couple of programming paradigms, what is but another

(Famous last words)

Show thread

gasp I've been given the opportunity to TA the functional programming and logic course... but I do not know logic programming...

There are aesthetic problems with my type system and I do not like it

Primes appear to like progress according to some pattern, right. But this pattern is completely opaque somehow. It's like whatever you expect to come next, that's not it, but it's not so far off base so as to dissuade you from thinking there is a pattern. The primes taunt us, basically, because they know they can get away with it

Continuing on my journey of not really understanding things until I actually implement them

Show thread

We seem to be doing closure conversion in the same breath as defunc in this class
It's really closure conversion + hoisting but it ends up with an apply

Show thread

I'm really taking this TAing thing by the seat of my pants huh

Show thread

Oh defunctionalization is kinda like hoisting! But with datatype and an application function instead of a top-level function for each lambda

Can you believe I had forgotten to add the Haskell emoji to our instance? :haskell:

Show older
types.pl

A Mastodon instance for users who like the study of programming languages, formal semantics, types, and linguistics.