category theory 

I lost my original thread so here's a new one. also you have to read the CW like "ka-TEH-guh-ree"

Does the category of categories and functors contain itself

category theory 

× (Cartesian product)
× (product category)
× (product functor)

notation overloading much

category theory 

Algebra of Programming is a far better text on category theory for my background than is Basic Category Theory, so far
It has ass-backwards notation but once you overcome that the examples are all things I know
It gets straight to the good stuff too. No dilly-dallying before getting to monics and epics

re: category theory 

I finished the section on functors but I couldn't prove that f ∘ g = id implies that g is monic and f is epic so I'm stopping here

Follow

re: category theory 

I have learned what a natural transformation is but in the examples they give they don't specify the functors and categories so I'm, like, decoding all of it
I'm like the type elaboration engine for these examples

re: category theory 

I have once again confused the product category with the product functor

re: category theory 

Natural transformations are confusing
I keep mixing up arrows with functors with transformations and objects with categories with functors

re: category theory 

@ionchy Then you're doing it right

re: category theory 

@ionchy To quote Phil Wadler: "A natural transformation is a 2-morphism in the category of categories, where's the problem?"

Sign in to participate in the conversation
types.pl

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