I have this notion that the proof irrelevance modality ought to be logically equivalent to the composition of two distinct monads — just enough to cause it to not be idempotent — but I can't prove one direction of the equivalence I expect to hold.
I have this notion that the proof irrelevance modality ought to be logically equivalent to the composition of two distinct monads — just enough to cause it to not be idempotent — but I can't prove one direction of the equivalence I expect to hold.
-
(no subject)
Something that's bugged me for a long time is this: How many paths, starting at the origin, taking N steps either up, down, left or right, end up at…
-
(no subject)
Still sad that SAC seems to end up being as complicated as it is. Surely there's some deeper duality between…
-
(no subject)
I had already been meaning to dig into JaneSt's "Incremental" library, which bills itself as a practical implementation (in ocaml) of the ideas in…
- Post a new comment
- 0 comments
- Post a new comment
- 0 comments
